Standards Classification and Reality Problem Statement (was Re: Not a problem statement [ was Re: Killing old/slow groups - transition thinking)

[Fred Baker]

At 02:45 PM 12/13/2002 -0800, James Kempf wrote:
>The issue here isn't the perception
>that Informational documents are Standards, but rather that a WG ID will
>inevitably become the standard, without substantial modification in any 
>form of
>its basic design and contents.

Hmm.

Is this a matter of frustration/concern? I thought that the reason we met 
in working groups was to develop consensus documents that would support 
interoperable implementation, which is to say "to become the standard".

If that's not the expectation, what in the world are we spending all this 
time and aggravation trying to do?