[tdwg-humboldt] Humboldt Extension Public Review preparations

[John Wieczorek]

Hi folks,

Steve and I have been working through and finished (to the extent we can)
the preparations of the documents needed for the public review of the
Humboldt Extension. The idea is that the basic entry point to the review
would be this landing page
<https://github.com/tdwg/hc/blob/main/docs/index.md> and that everything
to review would be accessible from there.

We need the Task Group to finalize all documents to be included and to
authorize the Darwin Core Maintenance Group to initiate the review. When
authorized, the Darwin Core Task Group will send a message introducing the
submission and how people should review it. It would be great to have a
brief statement presenting the proposal from the Task Group to have at the
beginning of that message. The DwC Maintenance Group will also solicit the
TDWG Outreach folks to publicize the public review via various channels and
social media. Anyone will be welcome to further publicize it in any
community that TDWG misses.

The issue of new terms for by-catch came up late in last Wednesday's
meeting after several people had to leave. I don't feel comfortable
including anything official from that conversation without the Task Group
making decisions. There are a few reasonable options.

The first option for the "by-catch" terms is to add those terms now and
include them in the proposal. That means work up front to make sure
the terms are well-defined and thought through. Think of this ratification
process very much as if it was the publication of a manuscript with peer
review. As such, an important goal is to try to avoid avoidable public
discussion, which has the potential to slow things down or even derail
ratification.

A second option might be to propose the new terms during public review and
see if there is buy-in. This strategy is likely to make the ratification
process slower, and runs a risk (that I might be inventing) that if such an
added proposal came from people in the Task Group, reviewers might view
that our work was submitted unfinished.

A third option might be to leave the proposal as is without additional
terms, get it through ratification, and sometime afterwards propose new
terms. This follows the normal evolution process of Darwin Core, so there
would not be anything odd about it. It would also guarantee that there is
demand for such terms, as that is a prerequisite for accepting new term
proposals.

It isn't for the Darwin Core Maintenance Group to decide the strategy
the Task Group should take, but rather to advise and facilitate in the
search for a successful proposal

I hope this feels like we are getting close.

Cheers,

John and Steve on behalf of the Darwin Core Maintenance Group
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-humboldt/attachments/20230811/b5eb3d8b/attachment.html>