Hi Bruce,
Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> On Jan 29, 2007, at 3:14 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 -
> Hamburg wrote:
>
>> I would suggest "under discussion", because if you want to make
>> changes to it, then it needs to be re-approved.
>
> And how would you suggest handling this? Can I present a proposal with
> the suggested changes to the already approved one? They are minor changes.
Of course, you can.
>
> If yes, when would be reasonable to put that on the agenda?
My understanding was that you want to adapt it to the outcome of the
meta data SC. If that's the case, the the right time to put is on the
agenda when the required details are agreed in the SC.
>
> I want agreement that the citation field goes in 1.2. It's been sitting
> on the sidelines for too long.
I agree. It should go into the 1.2
>
> Bruce
>
