+1 for the idea. Few More Suggestions:
1) Glossary of terms can also be bifurcated based on business processes or OFBiz components. For Example, inventory can have business terms like ATP, QOH, Back Order etc. 2) We can also incorporate business terminologies used in real world. So, people can relate those terms to the framework. Also, I would like to contribute to this glossary enrichment effort too. Thanks and Regards, Shivangi Tanwar On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Devanshu Vyas <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > >
