Nice idea Rajesh, Shivangi. +1
Best Regards, *Sanjay Yadav * Manager, Enterprise Quality Assurance www.hotwaxsystems.com www.hotwax.co On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Shivangi Tanwar < [email protected]> wrote: > +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 > > > > > >
