TCG discussion about the WD Standards numbering nomenclature

As per section 3.5 of the IVOA Technical Assesment and Roadmap for 2008:

---

The numbering nomenclature of the working drafts of IVOA standards in preparation is not homogeneous across WGs and makes it quite confusing for people not used to it.

Although there are already some numbering schemes envisaged in sections 4 and 5 of the Guidelines and Procedures for IVOA Document Standards Management v1.0, dated 25th April 2004, it would be useful to have a numbering nomenclature which clearly and immediately shows that a certain IVOA standard is a REC or in a WD. Of course, that would take place only for the new standardsto be produced.

Various options can be envisaged, so some discussion should take place within the TCG in coordination with the Standing Committee on Standards and Processes to determine a possible better scheme.

---

But we don't need to change the scheme if we feel that the current one is adequate, so each WG/IG chair should express clearly her/his choice :

1. I am happy with the existing scheme, so I will use it and make sure I enforce it for all future WDs.

2. I believe that the existing scheme could be improved, so I explain why and how I feel it could be improved.

---

TCG, Christophe Arviset, Severin Gaudet

---

IVOA, Fabio Pasian

---

Applications, Tom McGlynn, Mark Taylor

---

Data Access Layer, Keith Noddle, Jesus Salgado

---

Data Model, Mireille Louys, AnitaRichards

---

Grid and Web Sevices, Matthew Graham, Paul Harrison

---

Registry, Ray Plante, Aurelien Stebe

---

Semantics, Sebastien Derriere, Norman Gray

---

VOEvent, Rob Seaman, Alasdair Allan

---

VO Query Language, Pedro Osuna, Yuji Shirasaki

---

VOTable, François Ochsenbein

---

Standard and Processes, Francoise Genova

---

Astro RG, Masatoshi Ohishi

---

Data Curation and Preservation, Bob Hanisch

---

Theory, Herve Wozniak, Claudio Gheller

---