Dear all,
I am forwarding an email from Steve to the list. For some reason his
original email did not make it through.
All the best,
Thanasis
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the proposed text for the frame of reference for Extension
Working Groups for discussion on Wednesday.
In order to facilitate progress on issues concerning CRMbase and the
overall community, it is suggested that work on extensions be devolved
to separate Working Groups. The membership of such WGs would be
self-selecting from the community of specialists in the relevant area.
Each group would then craft a motivation statement that would cover at
least the following points:
i) The topics to be addressed
ii) The process that will be followed
iii) The timetable for the activities
Iv) What, if any, support will be required from the main body of the SIG.
This statement should be presented to the main SIG at the next meeting.
When the Topics detailed in the motivational statement have been dealt
with the WG should report back to the main body of the SIG. To
facilitate this, two documents should be circulated at least 2 weeks
before the SIG meeting. The first is a complete and fully revised copy
of the extension document that incorporates all the recommendations that
the WG are making. This revised extension document should be formatted
using the latest templates and best practice guidance to facilitate the
production of web and serialisation resources. In the unlikely event of
the WG asking for alternatives to be selected from by the main body of
the SIG, then each possible outcome should have a complete extension
document prepared. This will facilitate the quick publication of the
selected alternative.
The second submission is a detailed change document. It
should be divided into two parts. The first should detail all
substantive or major changes, including new classes or properties,
changes to scope notes and adjustments to Quantification. These changes
should be supported by explanatory notes that detail why the proposed
changes were necessary and including any alternatives that were
considered. If the SIG is being asked to select between alternatives,
then the reasons or arguments that caused the WG to be unable, or
unwilling, to propose a single solution should be fully rehearsed so the
SIG as a whole can make an informed decision. It should be noted that
this is NOT the preferred state of affairs: the point of the WG is that
the specialists in the sub-domain provide the optimal, informed
solution. The second part of the change document should detail all minor
changes, like correcting typos, adjusting labels or adding and improving
examples.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
