[DFDL-WG] OGF spec updates - planning for errata vs. editorial vs. respins

[Steve Hanson]

Thanks Mike.  As discussed, we should endeavour to keep errata on GFD.207 
to a minimum, and defer everything non-essential to a future DFDL 1.1. 

Regards
 
Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848



From:   Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com>
To:     "dfdl-wg at ogf.org" <dfdl-wg at ogf.org>, 
Date:   23/09/2014 14:44
Subject:        [DFDL-WG] OGF spec updates - planning for errata vs. 
editorial vs.   respins
Sent by:        dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org




Below are the relevant 3 paragraphs from: 
http://www.ogf.org/Public_Comment_Docs/Documents/2007-10/draft-gwdc-gfsg-c1-v3.doc.pdf


Our existing errata process divides into editorial things (which we just 
fix), minor tech issues, major tech issues which is consistent with the 
below. 

Note that the discussion suggests not a separate errata document, but that 
the errata must be added to the spec itself - and the notion that they are 
listed on the cover sheet means they are anticipating only a relatively 
small set of such errata compared what has happened since 2013 Sept.

To me this suggests such errata are not suitable for anything one can 
anticipate as a "parked issue" for the future. Such things must be in a 
new revision of the standard.

Editorial fixes applied within the first month after publication will 
generally not be publicly 
announced to the OGF community. Any other changes to a document, whether 
major or minor, 
will be announced using the same mechanism as for a newly published 
document (i.e., email to 
the OGF community, posting to the OGF Web site, etc.).

Whenever a document is updated, even for minor editorial updates, the 
document header will be 
adjusted to reflect the date the document was updated. The date of the 
update should appear in 
the upper right side of the document's first page, beneath any prior date. 
For very minor updates, 
especially those within the first month after publication, no additional 
information needs to be 
added to the document. A publicly accessible archive of all old versions 
of the document is 
maintained, and accessible through the same means as current documents.

For all other updates, minor and major technical fixes, an errata report 
must be added to the 
document itself. Recommended practice is to put an errata report labeled 
as “Document Change 
History” on the first page of the document, directly under the copyright 
statement and before the 
abstract. A brief report on what was changed is sufficient, along with the 
date. If a more 
discussion is desired, the Document Change History can refer to a later 
section where the update 
is discussed in detail.



Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | 
www.tresys.com
Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are 
subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
--
  dfdl-wg mailing list
  dfdl-wg at ogf.org
  https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20140923/76ed8201/attachment-0001.html>