On Jul 29, 2013, at 3:59 PM, t.p. wrote: I think the points you make below are good, once the newcomer to the I was thinking this morning that clever short WG names are fine, but we shouldn't try too hard to make them acronyms - or at least, we shouldn't pretend that the acronyms suffice as descriptions for the WGs. In lists of WGs, we should include brief descriptions of the WGs, not the acronym expansions. Keith |