Difference: StandardsProcessReview (1 vs. 2)

Revision 22015-10-27 - MatthewGraham

 
META TOPICPARENT name="IvoaTCG"

Standards Process Review

The IVOA aims to be responsive to community feedback: for example, the new Operations Interest Group serves as a focal point for discussions about the implementability and running of IVOA protocols. In recent months, the IVOA standards process has received a number of comments:

  • Significant comments on a standard are coming in after the official RFC period has ended
  • It is unclear what a reference implementation is, e.g, do they implement all aspects of a standard, or who should be implementing it
  • How much of the standard should a validator test and who validates the validator?
  • The standards process is too slow to meet community schedules
  • Standards need to be better informed by implementation as part of the design process
In response to these, the IVOA Exec has decided to commission a timely review of it. For those attending the Sydney Interop, there will be a plenary session to solicit community feedback on the successes and shortfalls of the existing procedures. For those unable to attend and/or who would prefer to submit written comments, you can:

  • attach text to this wiki page below
  • email them to Matthew Graham and Francoise Genova if you would prefer to remain anonymous
Changed:
<
<
>
>

 

Comments on the standards process


<--  
-->

Revision 12015-10-27 - MatthewGraham

 
META TOPICPARENT name="IvoaTCG"

Standards Process Review

The IVOA aims to be responsive to community feedback: for example, the new Operations Interest Group serves as a focal point for discussions about the implementability and running of IVOA protocols. In recent months, the IVOA standards process has received a number of comments:

  • Significant comments on a standard are coming in after the official RFC period has ended
  • It is unclear what a reference implementation is, e.g, do they implement all aspects of a standard, or who should be implementing it
  • How much of the standard should a validator test and who validates the validator?
  • The standards process is too slow to meet community schedules
  • Standards need to be better informed by implementation as part of the design process
In response to these, the IVOA Exec has decided to commission a timely review of it. For those attending the Sydney Interop, there will be a plenary session to solicit community feedback on the successes and shortfalls of the existing procedures. For those unable to attend and/or who would prefer to submit written comments, you can:

  • attach text to this wiki page below
  • email them to Matthew Graham and Francoise Genova if you would prefer to remain anonymous

Comments on the standards process


<--  
-->
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by Perl This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platformCopyright © 2008-2024 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback