 |
 |
To DC-Usage Board: Since noone answered my question about a standard form for our proposals, I made one up. I had agreed to sending forward a "fast-track" proposal for the addition of an encoding scheme for Language. See attached. I did not think there was a need for further justification, since this one is fairly straightforward. I have included what I thought should be in the definition on the Web site. We do detail what we expect in proposals in our process document, but we don't specifically deal with what is needed for the fast track proposal. If it is the same as what's in the process document, I would need to add examples (didn't think that would be helpful for an encoding scheme), discussion of overlap, summary history of discussion, analysis of impact, analysis of interoperability, justification of the need. I thought for an encoding scheme proposal none of that would be necessary, although it isn't clearly stated in the process document (maybe we need to do that). Please let me know if you think anything further is needed. I guess this will be our first test case for a fast track proposal. I'm also not sure we need to vote on this kind of proposal. We're not really specific about that either (although we say that "fast track" proposals may bypass a portion of the normal process). Rebecca