I believe that the EFSP and IP Policy are not clear with regard to the intention of the scope statement. From an intellectual property flow perspective, I believe that it is the scope of the specification that actually matters. The specification's scope is to "define" a specification; the specification project's scope is the "provide" the specification document and related technical artifacts. I believe that these are different in intent and should be called out as such.
I believe that the EFSP and IP Policy are not clear with regard to the intention of the scope statement. From an intellectual property flow perspective, I believe that it is the scope of the specification that actually matters. The specification's scope is to "define" a specification; the specification project's scope is the "provide" the specification document and related technical artifacts. I believe that these are different in intent and should be called out as such.