Proposed Role Descriptions for SOA-RM Editors

[Thomas Erl <terl@serviceorientation.org>]

It's encouraging that we have six or seven individuals willing to
participate as editors. Being one of them, I'm looking forward to working
with you all. However, I am concerned that without a system in place for
coordinating individual efforts, we may waste time and risk confusion while
trying to keep everything in alignment.

Our goal should always be for our collective work to facilitate the TC
membership and the evolution of the reference model. I therefore agree that
we should designate a chief editor to assume ultimate responsibility for the
on-going quality of the reference model document and to oversee the overall
collaborative process. I also believe that we should clearly define the
relationships and boundaries between those that assume the role of "Editor"
and the designated "Chief Editor".

I've had some experience in this area, so to get things started, I've
written up proposed role descriptions. Hopefully they will be helpful in
getting us organized. Your feedback is welcome.

Editors
- Are each assigned the responsibility of maintaining a distinct and
meaningful portion of the reference model.
- Must be diligent in keeping their respective content areas current and
representative of contributions accepted by the TC as a whole.
- Maintain lists of outstanding issues specific to their content areas.
- Should proof and copyedit their own work as much as possible so as to
minimize the workload of the Chief Editor.

Chief Editor
- Ensures that the reference model document is maintained in compliance with
existing OASIS documentation standards and any further conventions agreed
upon by the TC.
- Ensures that the predefined scope of the reference model is not exceeded.
(Candidate items raised by the TC beyond the scope of the reference model
should be maintained on a separate list until it is decided by the TC that
these items fall within or outside the scope.)
- Ensures that submissions from individual Editors are consistent in writing
style, tone, terminology, and structure. (Chief Editors can either revise
submissions or mark them up and then request that Editors perform the
revisions. For the sake of expediency, I recommend the former approach as
long as revisions are returned to individual Editors in a timely manner.)
- Maintains a list of outstanding issues that apply to the document as a
whole or have not yet been classified, and delegates issues to Editors when
appropriate.
- Maintains a parent-level outline of the reference model document.
- Is responsible for version control of the reference model document and for
publishing revisions to the OASIS site.

Ideally, the Chief Editor would also be the one responsible for reading
through position papers and other documents submitted by members to ensure
that:
- redundant content is filtered
- content outside of the reference model scope is separated
- relevant content is brought forward for consideration by the TC

Because we have a sufficient amount of volunteers, I would suggest that we
consider balancing the workload by limiting the duties of the Chief Editor
to quality control and facilitation. This means that only individual Editors
author and edit the sub-documents that comprise the reference model
document. The Chief Editor is not actually assigned a separate part of the
document, but instead governs the process of unifying sub-documents into the
master reference model document.

Regards,
Thomas Erl

P.S.
Also of interest, from the OASIS TC Guidelines:
"The TC Editor is the person who maintains the specification document(s) for
the TC. The editor writes drafts, updates the drafts with input from the TC
members, and makes the drafts available to TC members and to the public by
posting them on the TC mail list and/or giving them to the webmaster to post
on the web page. The editor should keep an ongoing list of open issues,
bugs, comments, etc. and their resolution."