My first thought is that step #1 is developing a formal statement of the spec, probably in Jenni Tennison's "datatype library language" or in DSDL Extensible Datatypes (ISO 19757-5). I've never actually used either of these languages myself, but they are explicitly intended for describing datatypes. > First, this spec need to undergo some form of standardization, > beyond this current process. Many people who are participating have > made it clear to me that although their organization has a great > deal of interest it cannot take it seriously or invest in it unless > it is on a standards track. > > So with that as a premise, which standards body? First, I'll list > those that I think are possible: W3C, IETF, and NISO. There are a > few others that come immediately to mind that you will say "why not > this one" or "why not that one", and I'm hoping to avoid that > conversation but will discuss it if pressed. I will say this about > ISO however: if this is standardized in W3C, it can now be > fastracked (that might not be the current term but you know what I > mean) in ISO. My preference is W3C. LC is a W3C member, I am the AC > rep, and that might make the bureaucratic process nearly tolerable. > And there are other technical reasons why I like W3C. > > However, I welcome discussion on this.