On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Nelson, Clark <clark.nelson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I’m not sure what, if any, is the process required/desired of such
>> updates.
>
> As established at the Urbana meeting, the process is that the consensus we
> need is of SG10, not WG21.

On that basis, I think it's sufficient for a change to have support on
this mailing list, rather than having been visible to the full
committee in a WG21 document, prior to being incorporated into SD-6
(with similar amounts of time allowed for objections).

So, +1 to using the attachment, following Jens' proposal.