[ogsa-wg] Link to OGF Errata process

[Hiro Kishimoto]

Thanks Jem,

 > I think my vote would go to publishing the Glossary as a
 > new version (because its changes are significant) and considering an
 > errata version of the OGSA Architecture. If nothing else it would test
 > the intent of the "major technical fixes" option and provide precedent
 > for future discussions.

Your proposal sounds quite reasonable to me.

Thanks again,
----
Hiro Kishimoto

-------- Original Message  --------
Subject: Re:[ogsa-wg] Link to OGF Errata process
From: Treadwell, Jem <jem.treadwell at hp.com>
To: Hiro Kishimoto <hiro.kishimoto at jp.fujitsu.com>, Andreas Savva 
<andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Greg Newby" <newby at arsc.edu>, "Mailing List for OGSA-WG" 
<ogsa-wg at ogf.org>
Date: 2007/07/17 2:42

> All, sorry once again for the slow response...  
> Andreas, thanks for the pointer: I've also now read through the errata
> guidelines. The "major technical fixes" option seems pretty broad, and
> might apply, but as Hiro says in his message it would need discussion
> and agreement with Greg and the AD's.
> After reading and thinking about it a couple of times it may not be a
> bad approach.  The purpose IMHO would not be to bring it into line with
> the Glossary so much as with the Data Architecture document, which is
> due for publication soon. Both the Data document and a revised Glossary
> would go through the full review process, and making well-contained
> changes to the Architecture document, with a revision history as
> prescribed by the guidelines, but without a full independent review,
> would be reasonable.
> It's a question worth resolving now because the same question could
> apply to *any* of the sections in OGSA that corresponds with the work of
> another group, as it could become out of sync at any time, and an errata
> approach to re-syncing it without a major update would make some sense.
> As a matter of policy, the same approach *could* be taken with the
> Glossary: if a related group publishes a document that invalidates some
> terms in the Glossary, it would be reasonable to fix the Glossary.
> However, in this case there are also major changes to the Glossary for
> other reasons, so the errata process doesn't fit.
> Dave & Andreas have actions to review the changes needed to the
> architecture doc.  If the changes are "reasonably" limited (whatever
> that means!) I think my vote would go to publishing the Glossary as a
> new version (because its changes are significant) and considering an
> errata version of the OGSA Architecture. If nothing else it would test
> the intent of the "major technical fixes" option and provide precedent
> for future discussions.
> - Jem
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ogsa-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
> Behalf
>> Of Hiro Kishimoto
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:28 AM
>> To: Andreas Savva
>> Cc: Greg Newby; Mailing List for OGSA-WG
>> Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] Link to OGF Errata process
>>
>> Andreas,
>>
>> I like an option publishing the Glossary out-of-sync.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ----
>> Hiro Kishimoto
>>
>> -------- Original Message  --------
>> Subject: Re:[ogsa-wg] Link to OGF Errata process
>> From: Andreas Savva <andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com>
>> To: Hiro Kishimoto <hiro.kishimoto at jp.fujitsu.com>
>> Cc: Mailing List for OGSA-WG <ogsa-wg at ogf.org>, Greg Newby
>> <newby at arsc.edu>
>> Date: 2007/07/11 12:49
>>
>>> Hiro,
>>>
>>> We talked about a few other options including only making those
> changes
>>> to the Data section that would bring it into alignment with the
>>> Glossary. I think that could easily fall in the editorial or minor
>>> technical fixes category.
>>>
>>> Anywya, I don't really see any urgency to produce a new version of
> the
>>> OGSA Architecture document at this point; especially if the main
> trigger
>>> for it is the Glossary! At the moment I am leaning more towards the
> idea
>>> of publishing the Glossary out-of-sync; or even to leave it as a
> stable
>>> group-internal document for now. The second option might not be very
>>> nice to Jem given all the work he put in.
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> Hiro Kishimoto wrote:
>>>> Thanks Andreas,
>>>>
>>>>> Following up on the discussion we had on the Glossary call the
>> proposed
>>>>> OGF Errata process is available on the OGF Editor project:
>>>>>   https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/ggf-editor
>>>> The topics we've discussed at the call are;
>>>> (a) Revising Data Service section (3.5 page 28-36) reflecting
>>>>     recent development of OGSA-data WG's data architecture
>>>>     document. and,
>>>> (b) Adding new reference model section reflecting consolidation
>>>>     discussion with reference model WG.
>>>>
>>>> They are obviously not either (1) Editorial fixes or (2) Minor
>>>> technical fixes defined by Greg's errata process. Thus they fall
>>>> in (3) Major technical fixes category.
>>>>
>>>> The OGF Editor suggests two options;
>>>>> there will need to be a decision whether to fix the document, or
>>>>> instead seek to write an updated document that will obsolete the
> old
>>>>> document.  This decision will be made in cooperation with authors/
>>>>> editors, the OGF Editor, the cognizant area directors, and GFSG
>>>>> (others as needed).
>>>> Although the Editor allows errata process for Major technical
> fixes,
>>>> I prefer to write an new version of the document since proposed
>>>> modifications, (a) and (b), are improvements but not *error* at
> all.
>>>> Just my two cents. Thanks,
>>>> ----
>>>> Hiro Kishimoto
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message  --------
>>>> Subject: [ogsa-wg] Link to OGF Errata process
>>>> From: Andreas Savva <andreas.savva at jp.fujitsu.com>
>>>> To: Mailing List for OGSA-WG <ogsa-wg at ogf.org>
>>>> Date: 2007/07/10 14:58
>>>>
>>>>> Following up on the discussion we had on the Glossary call the
>> proposed
>>>>> OGF Errata process is available on the OGF Editor project:
>>>>>   https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/ggf-editor
>>>>>
>>>>> The direct link is
>>>>>   http://forge.ogf.org/short/ggf-editor/errata
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>>   ogsa-wg mailing list
>>   ogsa-wg at ogf.org
>>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
> 
>