hello Cameron,
thank you for the message to the list...
regarding this statement from your message...
On 2020-07-31 09:48, Cameron Shorter wrote:
I think part of what we need to solve is a process for updating terms
which we can pass
to projects and foundations to follow.
based on how we manage term entries (terms & defs) in tc211 i dont
really believe that it is the task of the lexicon group or the lexicon
group manager to actually update the content of the terms. the manager
of the term entries probably does not have expertise knowledge about how
those terms were developed or how they should be updated -- that is the
task of the project groups (project leaders, developers, etc) who have
that expertise. the term manager would assist those project leaders and
developers in structuring the term entries correctly and clearly to
maintain uniformity with the current registry of terms, and in some
cases, where needed assist with any initial grammar/english issues.
we all agree that developing a suitable management process for dealing
with the term entries in osgeo is important. however, such a process is
not yet clear to me because, as i discussed earlier, i just dont
understand the mechanism in osgeo of how the terms will be submitted to
the lexicon group. in iso the terms are required to be submitted with
the draft document because basically the document is the project. in
osgeo, if i understand correctly, the software is the project and the
documentation, how much/little there may be, is part of that. within
that documentation one would hope there is a list of terms. if not, who
picks up the term entries from the documentation? it would not be an
easy task, in my opinion. is it possible to make requirements that the
project teams must follow to support the work of the lexicon group? i
dont know enough about osgeo's operations to know if that can happen.
i guess it is possible that if the technical writers were assisting the
project teams in preparing the documentation then such a case would
enable a flow where the writers together with the project
leaders/developers identify these term entries and could submit them to
the lexicon group. at that time, a management process in the lexicon
group would be needed/should be in place.
the management process used in tc211 works quite well and has been
refined over 18+ years of use. however i would have some reservations in
recommending all of the practices/solutions that tc211 uses to osgeo,
mainly because the groups are different and technology has changed. in
tc211 our group has been working with Ron and his team at Ribose to
update the tools (one of which is available to osgeo when the terms are
ready) we are using for term entry management and we have made a number
of significant changes and are now discussing updates to the core
registry... it just takes time and resources...
maybe i am just not understanding the current processes that exist in
osgeo, or not understanding the osgeolive positioning within osgeo.
maybe the technical writers are making user tutorials, and not project
documentation? i just dont quite understand yet.
i look forward to more discussions on this and i hope they will help me
understand these things better.
reese
_______________________________________________
osgeolive mailing list
osgeolive@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeolive
