[iaufwg] INHERIT convention

[Walter Jaffe]

I will avoid discussing the optimum structures for transmitting data bases
and confine myself to the role of the iaufwg in reviewing conventions.

I don't think that it is feasible for the iaufwg to make deep reviews
of the proposed conventions, and then expect or require the proposers
to "improve" the submission.  I think the review should confine itself
to whether the proposal is formally consistent with the FITS standards
and whether it meets the basic criteria for a convention:
it has an application, it is reasonably stable, and it is sufficiently
well documented that others can use it.

This begs the question of whether the expertise present in the iaufwg
can be used in fact to improve the convention.  While this is probably
desirable, I would separate this from the reviewing procedure.  We might
attach a blog and a revision history to each convention.  In the first
case people both in- and outside the iaufwg can make suggestions for
improvements and point out hazards inherent in the convention. The 
second would document those changes that the authors have made.

Walter