I like the idea, +1.

Thanks & Regards,
Devanshu Vyas.

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Rajesh Mallah <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi ,
>
> We use many technical terms throughout the pages and articles but
> the interpretation of the term may be  open or approximate to various
> stakeholders due to lack of common definitions and glossary.
>
>
> We already have a glossary page
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/Glossary
> But it is not very exhaustive yet.
>
> I was planning to go through the BPRB pages and prepare a list of all
> technical terms used in various pages for the purpose of enriching
> (extending) the glossary.
>
> I invite opinions on whether it is worth ?
>
> My Arguments in favour:
>
> (1) We need a common plane for definitions, if there is a disparity between
>       author's interpretation of a business term and the reader's or
>       reviewer's interpretation there shall be a communication gap.
>
> (2) For newbies it is a great resource  because it increases their
>       knowledge as well as ability of understanding more articles/pages.
>
> (3) consistency of articles: if all authors/contributors use the same
> terminology
>       then the content created by them shall relate to each other in a more
>       consistent manner.
>
> Implementation notes:
> ----------------------------
> currently we have our glossary in a flat list format with is the easiest
> way
> to get started. However as the volume of terms and documentation increases
> we shall also require to organise the glossary in a more methodical way.
> Some of the relevant standards are W3C standards like SKOS [1]  , OWL[2].
> I am not sure if confluence has components that allow organising vocabulary
> at this moment.
>
> Even if its' not there we can continue to enrich the Glossary / Vocab in a
> simple
> manner (and later migrate/upgrade it).
>
>
> References:
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/intro
> [2] https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/OWL
>

Reply via email to