Discussion of the Darwin Core Data Packages (DwC-DP) proposal has ticked up
over the last few weeks, so the ongoing public comment period will
continue beyond the originally announced 90 days, which would have ended on
December 15.
If you are unfamiliar with the functioning of public comment periods for
vocabulary changes, please review Section 3.3.2 of the Vocabulary
Maintenance specification
<https://tdwg.us9.list-manage.com/track/click?u=50f3cc44307841383062ca0d6&id…>.
To summarize briefly, if there is dissent about a proposal, the
proposal may be modified in an attempt to achieve consensus. Any
such modification triggers a reset of a 30 day clock to give people
sufficient time to consider the modified proposal.
Because of this mechanism, it is possible for a small number of people to
delay the acceptance of a proposal that is as large and complex as
DwC-DP for a long time. In the case of DwC-DP, there are a large number of
smaller individual proposals that are being considered as a package, and
modification of any one of the individual proposals will delay
the acceptance of the overall package for another 30 days.
The Darwin Core Maintenance Group is committed to a fair and open
review process of the DwC-DP, and will allow the public review to continue
for as long as necessary to achieve consensus. So as long as there is
active discussion, we will keep the public comment period open. However,
because there is keen interest in the community from people who want to use
DwC-DP in ratified form, we'd prefer that the review not drag on
indefinitely due to people not getting around to reviewing it in a timely
fashion. Therefore, if you have not yet reviewed the proposal, I
ask that you do so and submit your comments by January 16. If
those comments do not result in any changes in any part of the proposal
after
that date, the public comment could end on February 15 (30 days
later). Continuing discussion after January 16 would cause the comment to
continue correspondingly longer, and that's fine if the
discussion continues to improve the proposal.
We have gotten many excellent and substantive suggestions so far that have
improved the proposal, and I am grateful for those who have taken
the time to thoughtfully review and comment. I am hopeful that we will soon
have a strong final proposal that the Task Group will be able
to recommend ratification by the Executive Committee.
Sincerely,
Steve Baskauf
Darwin Core Maintenance Group convener
