[tdwg-tag] "Quality" in TDWG Standards

Kevin Richards 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. >>>

Dear Tags,

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...
URL: http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-tag/attachments/20071126/093d4c4f/attachment.html 

More information about the tdwg-tag mailing list