RE: [tgf] Proposed structure and development of TC deliverables;proposed working meeting

[Chris Parker <chris.parker@cstransform.com>]

Peter

 

I agree with John: very happy with this approach.

 

I do think at some stage we will want to produce some sort of single document which pulls all of this together, but I see three major advantages to your "small pieces / loosely joined" approach:

 

- it is practical in terms of managing the work

- it helps us in terms of a phased release of all this

- it also lends itself to a web-based presentation of the material and resources that will eventually get built up.

 

The timetable and order of prioritities also looks right.  The one caveat I'd make is that, in your first "rough decant", it would be well worth covering parts 5-8 as well as the higher priority 1-4.  That will help us in finalising decisions about how much of the material gets elevated up to the standards track.

 

I cannot make a meeting at any time on Friday 4th - I'll be on a plane to Australia.  I would very much like to be part of the call though, so is it possible to look into the following week?

 

Chris Parker

Managing Partner, CS Transform Ltd, +44 7951 754 060

 

---

From: John Borras [mailto:johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: 27 January 2011 08:54
To: peter@peterfbrown.com; 'TGF TC List '
Subject: RE: [tgf] Proposed structure and development of TC deliverables; proposed working meeting

Thanks you Peter, this is extremely helpful.  I concur with all aspects of your proposals and can see that following this approach we would stand an excellent chance of meeting my wish of a March deliverable.

 

To meet these deadlines we will need the outputs from Andy/Colin/Oliver/Nig on their various areas of responsibility for inclusion in the drafting process, so I hope they will be able to deliver to you in time.

 

John

 

From: Peter F Brown [mailto:peter@peterfbrown.com]
Sent: 27 January 2011 03:34
To: TGF TC List
Subject: [tgf] Proposed structure and development of TC deliverables; proposed working meeting

 

Hi:

My apologies again for missing this Monday’s meeting – I’ve since caught up with John and am following the different submissions to the list.

 

As promised, attached is a small note outlining a proposed structure of the deliverables. I hope that this will address some of the concerns and questions about how we physically structure what we want to produce in what sort of deliverable, in conformance with our Charter and the overview of deliverables in my last slide deck. Please let me have some feedback and any questions in the next couple of days on this.

 

Of note in particular is the proposal to have “several pieces loosely joined” to start with, so that we can progress several areas in parallel, allowing a certain autonomy of activity and without making editorial tracking a nightmare – nothing stops us ‘stitching them back together’ before adopting any formal position or deliverable.

 

If this note is acceptable, I propose that we proceed as follows:

-          I will do a first rough ‘decant’ of current materials and contributions into the proposed ‘containers’, and send the results to the list;

-          Individual TC members can volunteer to take ownership of a specific deliverable (or part thereof) and continue work on them;

-          I suggest that we have a working/drafting session at the end of next week to see how far we have progressed;

-          I would then do a full editorial write up of the whole, checking for consistency and coherence through the whole;

-          We have a first ‘cut’ of the four main parts ready for discussion at the next TC meeting on 17^th Feb

The objective by this stage is to have something that is complete (as in ‘all the necessary bits are there’) but not necessarily completed (as in finished).

 

For a meeting next week, I would need it to be Friday 4^th but am very flexible regarding the timing during the day. Please indicate in the following Doodle poll your availability and time preferences: http://doodle.com/p56xuz93r9nthnb9

 

I will reply separately regarding the issue of diagrams and models.

 

Cheers,

Peter

 

Peter F Brown

Independent Consultant

Transforming our Relationships with Information Technologies

Web         www.peterfbrown.com

Blog          pensivepeter.wordpress.com

LinkedIn  www.linkedin.com/in/pensivepeter

Twitter     @pensivepeter

P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA

Tel: +1.310.694.2278