Terminology issues: Grouping of terms

I am reworking the Terminology topic according to
the review comments and the following discussion on the TC mailing list:

  
results
from recent DITA 1.2 terminology discussions 

    From "Ogden, Jeff" <> on 16 Nov 2009
23:40:36 -0000
    
      
RE:
[dita] results from recent DITA 1.2 terminology discussions
        

        From "Tony Self" <> on 18
Nov 2009 10:57:57 -0000
        
          
Re:
[dita] results from recent DITA 1.2 terminology discussions
            

            From Eliot Kimber <> on
18 Nov 2009 11:10:18 -0000
            
              
vocabulary
module [was: results from recent DITA 1.2 terminology discussions]
                

                From "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)"
<> on 18 Nov 2009 15:30:56 -0000
              

              
Re:
vocabulary module [was: results from recent DITA 1.2
terminologydiscussions] 

                From Eliot Kimber <>
on 18 Nov 2009 15:34:19 -0000
              

              
RE:
vocabulary module [was: results from recent DITA 1.2 terminology
discussions] 

                From "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)"
<> on 18 Nov 2009 16:35:54 -0000
              

              
Re:
vocabulary module [was: results from recent DITA 1.2
terminologydiscussions] 

                From Eliot Kimber <>
on 18 Nov 2009 16:38:50 -0000
              

              
RE:
[dita] Re: vocabulary module [was: results from recent DITA 1.2
terminology discussions] 

                From "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)"
<> on 18 Nov 2009 17:13:17 -0000

            
          

        
      

    
  

  

Can anyone clarify for me what decision was made
about how to group the terms? On the first terminology call which I
chaired, we decided that Gershon would attempt to devise an ordering
scheme, but that we would default to simply listing the terms in
alphabetical order if the group did not come to a consensus on how to
group the terms.

Was a grouping order agreed upon? Or should I simply alphabetize the
terms?

Kris