OASIS policy for handling public review comments / What needs to be done for the "Lightweight DITA: An Introduction" review?

OASIS has very clear policies for handling public review comments .
(These rules apply whether or not the review of is a standard work track product (spec) or a non-standards track work product (committee note).
You can view the rules at https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process-2017-05-26#publicReview , but here is a brief summary: All review comments (e-mails to TC list or e-mails to dita-comment) must be formally acknowledged.
All review comments must be formally tracked.
At the close of the review, the TC must post to its e-mail list how it handled each review comment.
As spec editors, Robert and I handled the tracking for the DITA 1.2 and 1.3 releases in several ways: DITA 1.2 : We used a Wiki page to track the comments and generated a PDF of it for the formal posting.
DITA 1.3 : We used a Wiki page to track the comments and generated a PDF of it for the formal posting.
We tracked the changes to the source files in a spreadsheet: (Wiki page: Review #2) https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/PublicReviewDITA1.3-60Day (E-mail to TC list): https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201511/msg00083.html (Spreadsheet in SVN): http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/dita/trunk/spec/dita-1.3-change-log-2.xlsx DITA 1.3 Errata 01: We used a DITA topic to track the comments; the changes to the source were tracked explicitly in the Errata 01 document : (DITA source): http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/dita/trunk/spec/errata-01/comment-resolution-log-dita-1.3-errata-01.dita (E-mail to TC list): https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201610/msg00102.html When you do a public review of a document, you need to track the changes that you make to the source -- especially to determine whether or not they are material.
If changes are material, then the document needs to go out for additional public reviews until no more material changes are made.
My personal opinion: Using a DITA topic to track comments, their resolution, etc. was the best approach.
The only drawback was that we had to generate output in order for TC members to see work in progress.
Robert, your thoughts?
Obviously, there is work to be assigned and processes to be clarified: Who acknowledges each comment on the dita-comment list?
Who maintains the comment resolution log?
Whether to use a Wiki page or DITA topic for the comment resolution log?
Which comments are brought to the TC for discussion?
Which comments will editors immediately fix and then notify the TC?
Does the subcommittee want to play an intervening role?
For example, does subcommittee make tentative comment resolution and then refer to the TC?
(Note: This will take more time.)
Lots to talk over and digest.
I apologize in advance for the lengthy e-mail, but I don't see how I could have made it shorter.

--
Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting www.eberleinconsulting.com +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)