[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [security-services] Handling of acknowledgments
"Eve L. Maler" wrote: > > The issue of contributor lists came up a few times as we prepared for the > big January publication date. I would like to propose a consistent > template for handling this issue that I hope is fair to all. > > Currently, the various specs have a list of contributors on page 1, in most > cases listing the main document editor as a "first among equals" in > alphabetic order in that list but in one case listing the main editors > separately above. These lists are a little idiosyncratic, built up over > time but not with the same criteria applied in all cases. > > I suggest that we list the main editor(s) of each spec on page 1 as follows > (along the lines of the core spec): > > Editors: > [sort on last names] > Joe Blow, DahtCalm > Jane Row, IvyEdu [JeffH:] Joe and I agree that having a consistent treatment for all the editors/contributors to the specs is a Good Thing. I suggest a build on your approach wherein both the Editors and Contributors are listed on the first page, similar to the xmldsig spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/) and to our present specs other than core, with the addition of specific acknowledgements called out in the appendix as you suggest (e.g. "Krishna contributed the xmldsig section"; in addition to a separate list of the overall list of voting members). I don't think we need to do the 3-level breakdown that xmldsig/xmlenc do between editors/authors/contributors (eg http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/Contributor.html) since we haven't been working all along with that framework, and our contributor lists (suggestion: folks who've participated in specifying prose and/or schema that's been reflected in the docs) aren't enormously long. But, leveraging the criteria they specify for authors/contributors is likely useful for compiling our acknowledgements. > Eve continued: > > A new appendix, Acknowledgments, would be added to each spec, which would > read as follows: > ====== > The editors would like to acknowledge the contributions of the OASIS SAML > Technical Committee, whose voting members at the time of publication were: > > [sort on last names; list to be supplied by Steve Anderson] > Paul Apple, Foo Co. > Ann Bingham, Bar Inc. > Evan Cinch, Baz Company > ... > > The editors would also like to thank the following people for their > contributions: > > [subject to judgment of editors and requests by others] > o Mary Hadalittlelamb, former editor > o Peter Pan, who wrote the first draft of the section on XYZ > o John Doe, former chair of the Foo subcommittee > ... > ====== > > Whatever handling of contributor lists we agree on, it would be great if > all the editors could be ready to implement it before last call. Each > draft we publish will get more and more widely read and circulated, so it > would be nice to ensure that people get properly acknowledged for their work. > > Eve
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC