[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [tm-pubsubj] TC charter and deliverable 1 - PS definition vs PSdocumentation
Vocabulary - again ... I'm in the process of revisiting the whole PubSubj TC documents at the light of recent vocabulary debate and clarifications - including consistency with the TC Charter. As is, we have used the wording "published subjects definition" to refer to the first part of our requirements and recommendations. e.g. in the first paragraph of the Charter: "The purpose of the Topic Maps Published Subjects Technical Committee is to promote the use of Published Subjects by specifying recommendations, requirements and best practices, for their definition, management and application." and in the list of deliverables: "Recommendations, Requirements and Best Practices for the Definition of Published Subjects" I think now the use of "definition" here is incorrect. We have agreed that "published subject" is a subclass of "subject". I figure there is no way to make recommendations about how to *define* a subject, published or not, except drifting away again towards metaphysics ... It seems to me we are more accurately about *documentation* of published subjects - on the basis that the main difference between a subject and a published subject is that the latter is (properly) documented. So I propose to change *definition* to *documentation* in the statement of purpose and list of deliverables, as following. "The purpose of the Topic Maps Published Subjects Technical Committee is to promote the use of Published Subjects by specifying recommendations, requirements and best practices, for their documentation, management and application ... " Note : "application" is maybe not the best word too - at least it's not consistent with "usage" in the title of Deliverable 3 below ... 1. Recommendations, Requirements and Best Practices for the Documentation of Published Subjects 2. Recommendations, Requirements and Best Practices for the Management of Published Subject Documentations 3. Recommendations, Requirements and Best Practices for the Usage of Published Subject Documentations That needs a formal vote, since it's a revision of the Charter. So I suggest we should re-read the TC Charter all along, including list of deliverables, propose possibly any other rewording, and then vote globally on a revised charter. Opinions welcome. Bernard
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC