[Esip-documentation] ACDD 1.3 approval vote initiated

[John Graybeal via Esip-documentation]

The document I circulated Friday night (http://commons.esipfed.org/acdd_1-3_references) has pointers back to all the historical documentation.

On the one hand, it's true that it takes a lot of time to find the relevant historical material, especially as many changes were being made to the Google table and discussions were held/modifications made in 4 or 5 forums. On the other hand, I'm not sure I've ever seen such thorough history available for any convention iteration (though I'm sure there are some!), so the fact we kept a fairly detailed record of an extensive and heavily discussed set of changes should not be a negative.

Having spent the two hours to look up this particular issue, I can vouch that we had changed the definition for creator_name as Nan described. It reverted back to the circular form after we had the big discussion about changing the meanings of attributes. I can't recall whether we explicitly discussed that reversion, only that it's been that way since October 1. Further details available on request.

John


On Dec 23, 2014, at 09:28, Nan Galbraith via Esip-documentation <esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:

> I'm going to have to vote no, mainly because of the remaining circular
> definitions of the terms for roles - creator and publisher.
> 
> For creator (or creator_name), we had agreed on 'the person principally
> responsible for originating this data' - I know there was a lot of discussion on this but I had no idea we were rolling back to the
> original non-definition, 'the person principally responsible for
> creating this data'.  My understanding was that some people had been
> adverse to changing from creator to creator_name, but were fine with
> 'person principally responsible for originating the data'.
> 
> Since the versions and discussion pages have disappeared, I can't confirm the wording that I thought we'd agreed upon, without paging
> through dozens of emails with subject lines that don't reflect the contents.
> 
> One of the main problems with the original version of ACDD, IMHO, was
> that the definitions were not useful or clear. If we're not going to
> fix that, then I don't see much use in updating the spec.
> 
> Regards - Nan
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting John Graybeal via Esip-documentation <esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org>:
> 
>> Hello everyone,
>> 
>> On the Documentation Cluster call today, we initiated the vote on
>> approving ACDD 1.3. As agreed, we will keep this vote open to
>> Documentation Cluster members until end of the day December 31,
>> 2014. You can vote on whether to approve the convention at
>> http://doodle.com/t7tni9ab2a2xhnmf.
>> 
>> As our validation that no one is spamming that link, once voting has
>> closed I'll copy the final names and votes into an email to this
>> list, so that everyone can see their vote was recorded correctly.
>> 
>> Other results of the discussion:
>> 
>> We clarified that none of the 1.2 versions were ever approved or
>> recommended for use; the recommended version is 1.1 as of today, and
>> will be 1.3 once it is approved. (Some have informally recommended
>> 1.3 already.)
>> 
>> We made a minor change to the document; and I agreed to make one
>> other change to the associated documentation once version 1.3 is
>> approved:
>> 
>> The minor adjustment was to move creator_url to the Recommended
>> section, to be consistent with the publisher_url recommendation.
>> 
>> The documentation change is that non-normative documents which are
>> referenced by 1.3 in the Additional Materials section (things like
>> mappings, ISO translation, order of precedence, etc.) will have
>> appropriate notations added to the top of each document, reflecting
>> that they are historical references and not normative or necessarily
>> current. As these are not normative, I feel comfortable changing
>> them as seems appropriate, subject to further review of course.
>> 
>> And with that, our changes to the ACDD 1.3 voting document have been
>> completed, and I thank everyone for your patience, participation,
>> and persistence throughout!
>> 
>> Please vote!
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------
>> John Graybeal
>> Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org
>> MMI Ontology Registry and Repository: http://mmisw.org/orr
>> email: jbgraybeal at mindspring.com
>> skype: graybealski
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-documentation mailing list
> Esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-documentation

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-documentation/attachments/20141223/930d5947/attachment-0001.html>