rubric for SC brainstorming

In yesterday's call, we talked about subcommittees needing some kind of
cover for creative discussion and brainstorming so that outside readers
of the discussion won't take it as guidance from the TC. The relevant
bit from the minutes (as amended to include Seth's name):
 
> Seth Park: For DITA and composite environments, we came up with 
> a feature request that was technically not implementable.  
> Is there a `code word' under which to talk in papers and  
> not shut down creativity.
> MB: A standard disclaimer would be wonderful. 
> Don, MP: Let's pursue that on the alias.

I imagine two aspects of a disclaimer, its content and its location.

For example, on the title page or in a footnote on the title or in a
note paragraph placed prominently on the first page (to be decided), a
subcommittee document might say something like:

This paper reflects exploratory work by a subcommittee of the DITA
Technical Committee. It is not a reliable guide as to the future
direction of DITA, and should not be taken as guidance for implementing
or using DITA. Such guidance is exclusively in the purview of the DITA
Technical Committee.

Let the discussion begin!

	/B