[Esip-documentation] [EXTERNAL] Re: Future directions?

[Mcgibbney, Lewis J (172B)]

Hi Folks,


From: John Graybeal <jbgraybeal at sonic.net>
Date: Monday, March 1, 2021 at 4:26 PM
To: Ted Habermann <tedhabermann at gmail.com>
Cc: ESIP Documentation LIst <esip-documentation at lists.esipfed.org>, Brandon Whitehead <b.whitehead at cabi.org>, Pier Luigi Buttigieg <pier.buttigieg at awi.de>, "Mcgibbney, Lewis J (172B)" <lewis.j.mcgibbney at jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Esip-documentation] Future directions?

On Semantic Tech we agreed we'd like to get more of the other cluster leads or attendees to 'report back', and we'd like to make the Committee all about the integration and understanding of progress in the individual clusters.

Over the last few years, we’ve done pretty well at recognizing topics of mutual interest and then building community around those topics to form clusters. Examples include science-on-schema.org, SWEET, semantic-harmonization and COR. One of the primary motivating factors was for these clusters to have the freedom of autonomy to create whatever it is that they are interested in rather than being bogged down by Committee business.
My message to people would be, if you are not interested in Committee business then you don’t need to attend the Committee meetings. Instead join your topical cluster of interest and do as much work as you feel necessary there. The Committee merely provides a governance structure at this stage. A way of operating if you will. Not much more.

Maybe even there is a role for engineering critique of cluster work to help people assess the work's reusability. Likely that would be fraught, but might be very stimulating for the attendees…

Maybe yes. I must admit however that I don’t see ESIP as much of an Engineering hub at the moment. I think of it more as a melting pot for ideas. That being said your vision for assessing reusability resonates with me John.

I need to admit that I thought the documentation community at ESIP was dormant. I am not aware of one thing the community has produced since I joined ESIP. Maybe I am just ignorant of what has been going on. Having sat on the ESIP Program Committee for the last two years however, I honestly can’t think of one mention of the documentation community.

It’s OK for some efforts to retire/die/be decommissioned. That’s part and parcel of community.

Lewis
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-documentation/attachments/20210302/56c55af8/attachment.htm>