Rwp01: Document layout & process

[Tony Linde]

Whoops! Forgot that this should have had Rwp01 as subject prefix...

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Linde [mailto:ael at star.le.ac.uk] 
Sent: 24 April 2003 20:54
To: 'IVOA Exec'; registry at ivoa.net
Subject: Document layout & process


I've finally got around to coming up with a document layout as promised to
the Registry Working Group. 

However, what I've put together (or hacked together) is a process and layout
that I think the IVOA should adopt for all its publications, so I'm copying
this to the exec mailing list as well.

I started out trying to adapt the GGF document process and layout but ended
up twisting my brain inside out to get different types of document to fit
all the category permutations. I gave up on the weekend and have gone with
the W3C standards instead.

I've used the W3C 'Consortium Process Document':
  http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/process.html
and have so far only adapted section 5, 'Technical Reports':
  http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/process.html#Reports

I think we also need section 8, 'Member Submission Process':
  http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/process.html#Submission
but can debate how much of the rest of the document is needed.

I could not get at the document layout standards as they're in a
'members-only' area so I took one of the OWL documents, 'Web Ontology
Language Reference':
  http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/
and adapted that to our needs. I've not written instructions, just knocked
up a sample document but we can come up with proper layout instructions if
people are happy with this example.

The attached zip file contains two html files:
  IVOA-Doc-Process.html
  WD-RegQueryLang-20030421.html
and supporting css and image files.

The first is the process document and the second the sample layout. I've
rewritten all of the process document, conflating five steps to three and
cutting and revising other stuff but most of the sample is garbage with just
enough headings and links to make it obvious what a real document should
look like. There are probably still broken and inappropriate links in both -
please ignore them.

The process document mentions a Technical Director (TD) and Technical
Advisory Group (TAG). The TD fulfils the role of IVOA 'keeper of the
architectural vision' as well as chief editor for all publications. The TAG
is a review group for documents. I've deliberately not stated the
composition of either the role or group - I'll look for suggestions from the
Exec for that.

So, what do people think?

Cheers,
Tony. 

__
Tony Linde                       Phone:  +44 (0)116 223 1292
AstroGrid Project Manager        Fax:    +44 (0)116 252 3311
Dept of Physics & Astronomy      Mobile: +44 (0)7753 603356
University of Leicester          Email:  ael at star.le.ac.uk
Leicester, UK   LE1 7RH          Web:    http://www.astrogrid.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ship.zip
Type: application/x-zip-compressed
Size: 31050 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/registry/attachments/20030425/8a4a20d7/attachment-0001.bin>