<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV>This all sounds good, I agree with having a list of criteria. But I do wonder if a lot of this topic is more suited to the Processes subgroup? eg criteria like "Is it clear who the stake holders and users are"</DIV>
<DIV>I see the TAG as a more "technical" oriented subgroup, so perhaps the emphasis should be on whether proposed standards are meeting technical requirements within the TDWG community (eg Modelling langauges, representations - xml, rdf etc, programming languages, protocols, web architecture, etc) - or maybe this is just my developer viewpoint of the situation?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kevin<BR><BR>>>> Roger Hyam <roger@tdwg.org> 25/11/2007 3:32 a.m. >>><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="COLOR: #000000">Dear Tags,<BR><BR>Bob Morris and Chuck Miller have made some interesting comments on <BR>this page in the wiki:<BR><BR><A href="http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/TAG/QualityAssurance">http://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/TAG/QualityAssurance</A><BR><BR>I'd like to throw this open to a wider audience as I am aware that <BR>many of you are not on the notify list of the wiki pages.<BR><BR>The question in hand (as I see it) is this.<BR><BR>The TAG has a role to play maintaining the "quality" of TDWG <BR>standards. If the executive (or any other member of TDWG) asks the TAG <BR>what its opinion on a particular standard or proposed activity is how <BR>should the TAG respond.<BR><BR>1) Should it have a list of criteria that guide it in assessing the <BR>standard/activity?<BR><BR>2) Should it take a completely ad hoc approach to each request?<BR><BR>My opinion is that we should have at least a list of basic criteria <BR>even if some of those criteria are not appropriate to all situations. <BR>Before we embark on building such a list does anyone disagree with the <BR>notion of having a list at all?<BR><BR>I'll take a week of silence as assent.<BR><BR>Many thanks for you brain cycles on this,<BR><BR>Roger<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>tdwg-tag mailing list<BR>tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org<BR><A href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag</A><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>