On 1/27/13 12:19 PM, t.p. wrote: > The point that Thomas made and John endorsed is that when we want to > speed things up, our current procedures allow us to do just that. We > do not need a formal process (more complications, more work). And as > John pointed out, having two independent Last Call discussions, on two > different lists, on communities that may have little overlap, is not > the way, IMO, to establish a clear consensus. If we don't need a formal process, then I'd like it clarified in WG training that this procedure already exists. Furthermore, I don't buy the notion about confusion. In the cases where this is likely to be done, either an emergency exists (which was the case with TLS, IMHO), or the draft is likely not to elicit much in the way of objection. This DOES happen. But that having been said, if both a WG chair and an AD make a bad call, there are numerous opportunities to correct it in this process, the NOMCOM process, appeal, etc. Eliot