[Moims-rac] Issues from Megameeting 7th January

[Lambert, SC (Simon)]

Hi all - I've been reviewing the transcript of the Megameeting last week
(7th January) and trying to extract the main points.  It was quite a
dense discussion with some proposals that were modified or withdrawn
later in the discussion, and as far as I can see there weren't many
definite conclusions, but maybe this summary could be helpful for
resuming the debate today.

  - The division of scope between B1.7 and B1.8 may not be optimal.
Particularly the second paragraph of B1.7 (beginning "Repositories that
report ...") might be unnecessary or in the wrong place.

  - I think it was agreed to eliminate the word "transformation" in
B1.7.

  - Is the "evidence" part of each item just to give examples, or does
it have a more mandatory significance in some cases?  (e.g. requiring
the existence of a policy)

  - Should the final document contain an annex, where non-mandatory
items should go?  Or annexes for illustration of particular
applications?

  - There is a methodological issue about revisions to the text.  If
these cause changes to the statement of the items on the "mandatory
requirements" pages, then presumably people should have a chance to
revise their ratings.  But how to keep track of what has been changed
and whether people have looked again at the requirements?

I am now in Brussels but hope to be able to join the Megameeting at the
usual time.

Regards,
	Simon