GSBPM: Remaining feedback already covered elsewhere

[Chris-ECE]

Hungary
To remove the numbering from the model. The use of the model should not be linear, this is communicated in the GSBPM: „The GSBPM should be applied and interpreted flexibly. It is not a rigid framework in which all steps must be followed in a strict order, instead it identifies the possible steps in the statistical business process and the inter-dependencies between them”. Numbering
UNECE response: Inserted into sub-process number issue page in github, as it matches the same feedback from ILO.

GSBPM “Task” task team (2022)
Sub-processes 5.3 & 5.4: There are some modern approaches/tools that could detect errors and edit them at the same time, which blur the distinction between sub-processes 5.3 and 5.4.
UNECE response: It was decided that 5.3 and 5.4 can happen simultaneously, and decided not to merge them for this reason when this was discussed in the context of Process phase issues.

New Zealand
Not sure if it should be in GSBPM or GSIM, but we like to see the need to managing long-timeseries Incl. revisions) mentioned in the documentation.
UNECE response: Inserted into Analyse phase issues where the matter of time series was discussed.

France
More specific guidance about archiving
UNECE response: Inserted into Disseminate phase issues, where archiving was discussed.