Jeff,

Thanks for picking up on the governance issue. One of the reasons I included 
chapter two was to demonstrate how a non-trivial change to the document could 
be handled.

The governance rules state that changes are to be "shown in the CF documents as 
provisional", but they do not mandate *how* they are to be shown. The 
combination of pull-request/commit history and the ability to view changes 
across versions(*) provides a very capable way to track, audit, and manage 
change.

As you stated previously:
> The more readable one doesn't follow the present policy - but maybe that 
> means the policy should be revised.

If it's purely the wording, as opposed to the intent, of the policy that's 
getting in the way then I would agree.


*) For example: 
https://github.com/cf-metadata/cf-conventions/compare/v1.6...master


-----Original Message-----
From: CF-metadata [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Jeffrey F. Painter
Sent: 12 March 2014 00:20
To: John Graybeal
Cc: Stephen Pascoe; CF metadata
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Editing/publishing workflow

For what I called "policies", see the preface to the CF Conventions document 
and the rules for changes at 
http://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/governance/governance-rules.   Although it's 
all in there (except for the observed fact that nothing has ever left 
provisional status), I actually learned what I stated from people on the 
governance committee telling me that I hadn't done something right.

For what I called the 'reST-based partial document', see

http://cf-conventions.readthedocs.org/en/v1.6/


- Jeff



On 3/11/14 5:10 PM, John Graybeal wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> I couldn't find either the CF Conventions policies, or the 'reST-based 
> partial document at readthedocs.org'.  Can you please provide more specific 
> pointers?
>
> John
>
> On Mar 11, 2014, at 14:08, Jeffrey F. Painter<[email protected]>  wrote:
>
>> The issue of choosing a markup language to use is more involved than it 
>> might seem.
>>
>> Here's one of many issues which would have to be settled:
>>
>> Present CF Conventions policies require that all changes be provisional, and 
>> marked as such in the document, until determined to be permanent at a later 
>> time (this determination has never been made).
>> That's the meaning of all the pink and yellow highlighting in the document 
>> at cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov.  The version control system (presently svn) keeps 
>> track of differences, but that's not enough - the document itself has to be 
>> marked to show what is and isn't provisional.  Getting that right is a 
>> significant part of the job of producing a new version of the document.
>>
>> So compare, for example, section 2.5.1 of the DocBook-based CF Conventions 
>> document at cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov (my apologies if the site gets blocked again!) 
>> with the same section in the reST-based partial document at readthedocs.org. 
>>   The more readable one doesn't follow the present policy - but maybe that 
>> means the policy should be revised.
>>
>> - Jeff
>>
>> On 3/11/14 1:53 PM, Signell, Richard wrote:
>>> Richard Hattersley started off this post showing how cool 
>>> restructured text was rendered:
>>> http://cf-conventions.readthedocs.org/en/v1.6/
>>>
>>> Why wouldn't we want to go this route?
>>>
>>> -Rich
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 4:47 PM,<[email protected]>   wrote:
>>>> 1. I think storing the conventions source in git is a great Idea 
>>>> which will make reviewing updated much easier 2. Markdown (github's wiki 
>>>> format) may not be the best option. What about latex?
>>>> 3. Take a look at Pandoc for format conversion 
>>>> (http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/). It works great for me and apparently 
>>>> supports docbook.
>>>>
>>>> Stephen.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Stephen Pascoe from iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On 11 Mar 2014, at 20:29, "Jeffrey F. 
>>>> Painter"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>> re word processor formats:  I'm not going that way, but if I had, it 
>>>> wouldn't have involved proprietary software.  I was tempted because there 
>>>> was no open-source XML editor which could usefully make sense of all 
>>>> features of the existing CF Conventions document.
>>>>
>>>> re markup languages: I haven't looked at any seriously, and most I've not 
>>>> looked at at all.  Most of the CF Conventions document, like most any 
>>>> document, is simple stuff which anything can handle.  But there are 
>>>> features which I'm not so sure about - custom tags, cross-references, and 
>>>> color-coded tables come to mind.  If an alternative markup language can't 
>>>> do it all, then we have to consider how much we value the missing features.
>>>>
>>>> - Jeff
>>>>
>>>> On 3/11/14 1:14 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> Converting to a simpler, more tractable markup format would be nice, but a 
>>>> couple comments:
>>>>
>>>>> A few months ago I looked into converting to a word processor format, but 
>>>>> it looked like a much bigger job than I could afford the time for.
>>>> Please dont go that way anyway! XML may be a pain, but if you're going to 
>>>> make a change, make a change to a format that is easier to mange in a 
>>>> version control system, and doesn't require proprietary software to manage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am willing to take an initial crack at putting the CF Conventions 
>>>> document in github format, if that's the missing piece.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> gitHub supports a number of different markup formats. Markdown is the 
>>>> default, and is nice an simple, but pretty limited. So take a look at the 
>>>> other options -- ReStructuredText (RST) may be a better option, for 
>>>> instance.
>>>>
>>>> -Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 11, 2014, at 09:44, "Jeffrey F. 
>>>> Painter"<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Richard,
>>>>>
>>>>> We (meaning LLNL people) don't really have positive plans to stay in 
>>>>> DocBook format.   It is simply less effort to use it than to identify and 
>>>>> convert to an alternative, if one exists.  We recently bought a copy of 
>>>>> the XMLmind XML Editor, which makes in reasonably tractable to edit in 
>>>>> DocBook.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect that most markup languages won't do all features used in the CF 
>>>>> Conventions document.  We may be able to work around that, but I'm not 
>>>>> sure of it.  A few months ago I looked into converting to a word 
>>>>> processor format, but it looked like a much bigger job than I could 
>>>>> afford the time for.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would be delighted if you could do this better!   You definitely have 
>>>>> the right idea for where we should be.   And I hope that having this 
>>>>> discussion on the cf-metadata list will bring out some more good ideas.  
>>>>> For the next few weeks, I don't think we at LLNL will do more than make 
>>>>> the documents, and the Trac system, reliably available on the web again, 
>>>>> and put the document sources on github.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/11/14 3:22 AM, Hattersley, Richard wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Jeff,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's excellent news. And thanks for the update - it'll save me 
>>>>>> duplicating your efforts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It looks like your current plans are for the source code to stay in 
>>>>>> DocBook format. Do you also have any plans to allow "instant" visual 
>>>>>> feedback? For example, to convert it to another format which can be 
>>>>>> rendered by GitHub (https://github.com/github/markup#markups) or 
>>>>>> reathedocs.org<http://reathedocs.org>?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: CF-metadata 
>>>>>> [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:cf-metadata-bounc
>>>>>> [email protected]>] On Behalf Of Jeffrey F. Painter
>>>>>> Sent: 10 March 2014 20:04
>>>>>> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Editing/publishing workflow
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Several of us at LLNL agree that a github-based system is the way to go 
>>>>>> for the CF Conventions.  And the previous messages on this thread turn 
>>>>>> out to be very timely!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For background, over the last few months our Plone-based web site has
>>>>>> become unmaintainable as we lost infrastructure support.   Just a few
>>>>>> days ago I gave up on fixing the system.  Matthew Harris has been 
>>>>>> working on a new web site, located mostly at github.  It should be up 
>>>>>> within a week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The CF Conventions "source code" has for many years been in in DocBook,
>>>>>> an xml dialect.  It is presently kept in a Subversion repository.   We
>>>>>> will very likely make this available on github.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the documents, the most important component of the CF Conventions 
>>>>>> web site is the Trac issue-tracking system.  Last week I migrated it to 
>>>>>> a more recent version on a new machine.  Over the next week I plan to 
>>>>>> migrate it to the latest production version.  This will continue to be 
>>>>>> hosted at LLNL, but a link to it will be on the github site.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope these changes will serve the CF community at least for the short 
>>>>>> run, so we can think seriously about what systems to use in the long run.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Jeff Painter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:20 AM, Signell, Richard wrote:
>>>>>>> Richard,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think moving to github would be a huge improvement.  The git 
>>>>>>> model and the tools that github provides would make it much 
>>>>>>> easier for other folks to propose changes, and for those changes to be 
>>>>>>> reviewed,
>>>>>>> discussed and merged.    I think Brian and a few others were also in
>>>>>>> favor when we discussed this last fall, but we lacked someone to 
>>>>>>> carry the flag.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Rich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Hattersley, Richard
>>>>>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>>>>>      wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've recently been dipping into the UGRID conventions
>>>>>>>> (https://github.com/ugrid-conventions/ugrid-conventions) and 
>>>>>>>> was struck by how pleasant the editing/publishing workflow was. 
>>>>>>>> Clearly from a content complexity point of view the UGRID 
>>>>>>>> conventions are smaller and simpler than CF so a direct 
>>>>>>>> comparison is not possible, but to help illustrate some of the 
>>>>>>>> possibilities I've prepared a cut-down demo version of the CF 
>>>>>>>> conventions document using GitHub and "Read the Docs".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The published versions of the demo are available from:
>>>>>>>> http://cf-conventions.readthedocs.org. I've set the default 
>>>>>>>> version to 1.6, but by using the options in the bottom-left 
>>>>>>>> corner of the page it is possible to view 1.7-draft.1 instead. 
>>>>>>>> There is also a PDF option, but that currently has a few quirks 
>>>>>>>> which I've not attempted to address. NB. By ticking a box in 
>>>>>>>> GitHub, these published versions are automatically updated whenever 
>>>>>>>> the underlying content changes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The underlying "source code" is defined using reStructuredText 
>>>>>>>> (reST) markup for processing by the Spinx document generator. It is 
>>>>>>>> hosted on GitHub at:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/cf-metadata/cf-conventions. I created the 
>>>>>>>> reST markup using an off-the-shelf HTML-to-reST converter but 
>>>>>>>> it did require some subsequent manual tweaks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've also created a simple "pull request" to illustrate what 
>>>>>>>> happens when someone proposes a change:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/cf-metadata/cf-conventions/pull/1. NB. By 
>>>>>>>> default GitHub shows the changes in the source code, but it can 
>>>>>>>> also show a rendered version of the changes, much like the 
>>>>>>>> strikeout/highlight style used in the current workflow:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/cf-metadata/cf-conventions/pull/show/1/files
>>>>>>>> /e7c84
>>>>>>>> 59#diff-e7c84590262562a10e9fb4cf714098d3
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there interest in taking this further?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Richard Hattersley
>>>>>>>> Benevolent Dictator of Iris - a CF library for Python:
>>>>>>>> www.scitools.org.uk/iris<http://www.scitools.org.uk/iris>
>>>>>>>> Met Office  FitzRoy Road  Exeter  Devon  EX1 3PB  United 
>>>>>>>> Kingdom
>>>>>>>> Tel: +44 (0)1392 885702<tel:%2B44%20%280%291392%20885702>
>>>>>>>> Email: 
>>>>>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>     Web: www.metoffice.gov.uk<http://www.metoffice.gov.uk>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>>> John Graybeal
>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
>>>> Oceanographer
>>>>
>>>> Emergency Response Division
>>>> NOAA/NOS/OR&R            (206) 526-6959   voice
>>>> 7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
>>>> Seattle, WA  98115       (206) 526-6317   main reception
>>>>
>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>>> --
>>>> Scanned by iCritical.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CF-metadata mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> John Graybeal
> [email protected]
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to