norman at astro.gla.ac.uk
Thu Jan 31 09:25:53 PST 2008
Thanks for this. I keep reading this sequence, then mixing up the
On 2008 Jan 31, at 16:16, Matthew Graham wrote:
> # Working Group prepares Working Draft (version ≥1.0) and submits
> to Document Coordinator for posting in the IVOA document collection.
That's the important first step. I have the impression (partly
encouraged by Rob) that the document is in a state where Andrea might
legitimately send it to Bruno as a WD.
> # Working Group reviews the Working Draft. Two reference
> implementations of any associated software are recommended.
I think that the VOEvent group is primed to start using vocabularies
as soon as the rest of us can give them a fixed target. Alasdair
Gray, in the Explicator project, is working on a web service which can
help a (human or application) client explore a vocabulary. Do these
sound like `two implementations'?; if not, I share your curiosity
about what would.
> # The Chair of the Working Group, with consent of the WG, promotes
> the document to a Proposed Recommendation and submits it to the
> Document Coordinator for posting in the IVOA document collection.
Given that these implementations (if that is what they are deemed to
be) appear in the next couple of months, it might be that we can
manage a couple of iterations of the document in that time. If so,
I'm optimistic that we could get to the RFC stage four weeks before
Trieste (that is, before 21 April).
> # The Chair of the Working Group issues a formal Request for
> Comments (RFC) to the e-mail distribution listinterop at ivoa.net. The
> RFC and all comments must be logged on a TWiki page whose URL is
> given in the RFC. A minimum comment period of 4 weeks must be allowed.
> # The Working Group Chair responds to comments on the TWiki page. If
> comments lead to significant changes to the document, the status
> reverts to Working Draft (back to Step 1).
I'm not in a mad rush here, but we seem to have got some momentum
here, and I don't believe we have a massively hard document to develop.
How does that sound?
All the best,
Norman Gray : http://nxg.me.uk
eurovotech.org : University of Leicester
More information about the semantics