🚀 go-pugleaf

Having had to look up our Proposal Rules (X11/91-25) I find that  
 
a) we haven't been observing them precisely
b) they are not totally appropriate anyway
  
I would suggest the following changes
 
a) Eliminate the references to SC2 and SC10 (we could update 
these refs to SC12 +, but I think that it should be the responsibility
of all SCs to be checking other SC type A documents)
Delete paras III.D.5 and V.B.2
 
b) Eliminate the automatic "pros" 
Delete III.C
  
c) We need to recognise that their are other documents that we are
handling that are not going to be incorporated into the MUMPS 
Standard.
In the opening section replace all occurences of
"ANSI Standard MUMPS" and "MUMPS standard" with "ANSI Standard MUMPS 
language specification".
 
Add a completely new section to the end
"In addition to Proposals which are to become part of the MUMPS 
standard language specification the MUMPS Development Committee also 
has the following types of documents which are handled in a 
similar manner to these:
 
1. Proposals to be incorporated into standards produced by the
MUMPS Development Committee other than the MUMPS 
language specification (X11.1)
 
2. Specification Guidelines
These are documents which are intended to provide guidance and
direction for persons preparing modifications or extension to one of the 
standards produced by the MUMPS Development Committee
  
3. Technical Reports
These are documents which provide supplementary information
which may be useful to readers or implementors of the standards 
produced by the MUMPS Development Committee.
 
Items in category 1) are handled in exactly the same way as MUMPS
language specifications, except that they are incorporated in or create
new standards documents. 
 
Items in category 2) and 3) are handled in the same way except that 
they remain as standing documents of the MUMPS Development 
Committee once having achieved MDC Type A status. However, they 
may be amended or rescinded only by raising a Subcommittee Type
A document incorporating the amendment/recision to MDC Type A 
status."
 
In all the disclaimers delete all occurences of the word "language".
 
d) We also refer to ANSI in a number of places.
This should probably be replaced by ANSI/ISO with the following
exceptions and every reference to "canvass" replaced by 
"ANSI canvass/ISO approval"
 
--