How will we determine the point where the use case and requirements subgroup turns over its doc to the other groups? There are some who feel the use case subgroup's job is done at some point once the other groups have begun working. There are others who feel there is some kind of maintenance mode that follows. Others still think it should stay active.

On a related note, I think at one point I suggested to the use case mailing list that our issue resolution process might be valuable to the TC at large after straw man 3 and/or the face to face. I want to make sure that I was clear that my thought here was that Eve would take over the process at some point - whenever the TC as a whole deemed the group's work to be 'ready' (my first question, above) - as it could be effectively controlling the scope of our work. I'd imagine that the issues that come up will be more and more implemenation specific (as opposed to requirement-oriented) as well. I'd imagine a continuum of issues coming up, really, gradually moving from requirements to implementation details. So I thought that maybe if we had a requirements issue resolution process with a little forward inertia, maybe it would save us some time as we widen the audience.

I would appreciate your thoughts on these issues.