> Helen Jarvis: It is my clear understanding that the discussion on COENG should continue

Obviously I take issue with this (for reasons presented already), but for sake of argument:

Even if your understanding of this were right...what advantage is there to keep re-presenting the same old arguments on this issue (in this exercise of drawing out the facts on all sides)? Is there new evidence for either side of the COENG issue?

I could try to compile a Rich Text Format file (MS Word) table to illustrate the arguments as they presently stand, but is it worth the effort? Then we would spend endless time debating the structure and fairness of the schema;-) Meanwhile people are upset that not enough issues of N2406 are being discussed. Let us move on covering one topic at a time....