I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand I see the difficulty
for small groups doing work that is interesting and important to a small
audience, but largely irrelevant to others. On the other hand, knowing
that you have to be able to overcome voting apathy with information on
why the specification is any good, what is useful about it, etc, forces
a TC to come up with the FAQ, the end-user summary, the "why you should
care" blurbs. I wouldn't like to lose that aspect of the current system.
So if we do go for the domains, then they shouldn't be *too* constrained
in their membership.
Here's a semi-radical thought - if a TC can't explain why the world
(outside of a relatively small audience) should care about a spec, then
maybe the Committee Specification status is the right status to aim for?
The audience that knows and cares should also know that Committee
Specification status is a stable status. I'd like to see more
recognition of the Committee Specification status actually, I see it as
being akin to the IETF RFC on which much of the internet was built.
Lauren
--
Lauren Wood, Chair, Entity Resolution TC.
