Killing old/slow groups - transition thinking

[Margaret Wasserman]

>
>- It would be nice to know what "technical quality and clarity of the 
>specification is consistent with that expected for the maturity level to 
>which the specification is recommended" means to the IESG in more detail 
>than just that single line from 2026. And how are non-standards track 
>documents judged?

This actually relates to something I've been considering...

Is it possible that different levels of quality, completeness,
review, etc. would be acceptable for documents at different
levels of the standards track?

Perhaps we could have a light-weight review/approval process
for PS, and a more complete cross-functional review/approval
process for DS?  Or something like that?

This might allow us to do quicker iterative publications at PS,
with the full weight of the process being applied before going
to DS...

Margaret