[tdwg-tag] "Quality" in TDWG Standards
RichardsK at landcareresearch.co.nz
Sun Nov 25 21:23:55 CET 2007
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"
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?
>>> Roger Hyam <roger at tdwg.org> 25/11/2007 3:32 a.m. >>>
Bob Morris and Chuck Miller have made some interesting comments on
this page in the wiki:
I'd like to throw this open to a wider audience as I am aware that
many of you are not on the notify list of the wiki pages.
The question in hand (as I see it) is this.
The TAG has a role to play maintaining the "quality" of TDWG
standards. If the executive (or any other member of TDWG) asks the TAG
what its opinion on a particular standard or proposed activity is how
should the TAG respond.
1) Should it have a list of criteria that guide it in assessing the
2) Should it take a completely ad hoc approach to each request?
My opinion is that we should have at least a list of basic criteria
even if some of those criteria are not appropriate to all situations.
Before we embark on building such a list does anyone disagree with the
notion of having a list at all?
I'll take a week of silence as assent.
Many thanks for you brain cycles on this,
tdwg-tag mailing list
tdwg-tag at lists.tdwg.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tdwg-tag