On 01/06/2012 00:04, Paul Hoffman wrote: > Works for me, other than it should not be a "wiki". It should have one > editor who takes proposed changes from the community the same way we do > it now. Not all suggestions from this community, even from individuals > in the leadership, are ones that should appear in such a document. In practice, if this is to be a living document then it should be open for inspection and poking rather than preserved in formaldehyde and put in a display case, only to be opened occasionally when the curator decides the glass needs some dusting. That way leads to sclerosis. Please put it on a wiki and put all changes through a lightweight review system. If someone makes a change which doesn't work, then it can be reverted quickly and easily. This approach is much more in line with the ietf approach of informality / asking for forgiveness rather than permission / rough consensus + running code / etc. Nick