This is not limited to Holger's comments, which I can understand to some degree since most discussion on this list seems to take all the provisions so literally. But we must define what we are going to work on and some organizational rules for how the group will function. On the one member for one organization problem. I am not saying STEP would do, contemplate or suggest such action. STEP has been an active participant in standards activity and is a friend of those of us who cannot afford expensive commercial software.
More initial meetings are about to happen in Europe.
I personally welcome participation in our efforst without regard to geographic location and think we should find the most cost effective way to rotate meetings if that is possible. As I think Steve Newcomb has stated before that the ratio language is simply to avoid a situation where standards are drafted without adequate user input and it is not designed to exclude anyone. We don't have a group yet, only a collection of people debating under what conditions they might become a group if we could allay all the concerns with the charter. At some point the group will be fully formed and only after that could the question even arise. I think we should assume that all the attendees of the prior XTM organizational meetings, STEP and other likely participants are approaching this process in good faith.