[CF-metadata] proposed rules for changes to CF conventions

From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:15:10 +0100

Dear Balaji

> I'm not too worried about private standards emerging:
> it's probably the right way to go about small collaborations, and there
> is equal inertia in the large projects like IPCC, that I don't see them
> insisting on standards that exceed CF.

I think a middle way is needed. I agree that private conventions for small
collaborations are fine and inevitable. On the other hand, if all issues take
a long time to decide, even those which have wide applicability (which is the
majority) will not come into effect, and that would leave important issues
without a standard.

> Specifying a finite period for comments before moving to a vote seems
> like a good idea. Didn't we actually say two months, or something, at
> GOESSP?

I had proposed two weeks and that was thought too short. The proposal I made
the other day therefore has at least six weeks from proposal to decision.

Cheers

Jonathan
Received on Fri Jun 29 2007 - 08:15:10 BST