I believe that "The What" (credit requirements) is less important to the success of Version 4 in the market compared to “The How."

By “the How,” I mean the submittal requirements and the tools for delivering them which, as of yet, remain unknown. On some level, it will be impossible to adequately vote on the rating system without a good deal of the "how" being made public.

Since it's unlikely that there are any major substantive changes in approach to the credits in version 4, the argument that "we can't list the submittals until we know what the requirements are" doesn't make any sense.

If you know the basic approach, then you know what the submittal requirements are and the degree to which the credit is met is largely irrelevant when it comes to the tools and support given to project teams try to meet the system.

USGBC and GBCI should include information about the submittal requirements and the upcoming certification support tools in materials released in conjunction with the future V4 ballot.