Standards numbering nomenclature | ||||||||
Added: | ||||||||
> > | Text to go in the Assessment and Roadmap document | |||||||
The numbering nomenclature of the working drafts of IVOA standards in preparation is not homogeneous across WGs and makes it quite confusing for people not used to it. | ||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||
< < | It would be useful to have a numbering nomenclature which clearly and immediately shows that a certain IVOA standard is a REC or in a WD. Of course, that would take place only for the new standards to be produced. | |||||||
> > | Although there are already some numbering scheme envisaged (http://www.ivoa.net/Documents/Notes/DocStd/Procedures-20040425.html#WorkingDrafts), it would be useful to have a numbering nomenclature which clearly and immediately shows that a certain IVOA standard is a REC or in a WD. Of course, that would take place only for the new standards to be produced. | |||||||
Added: | ||||||||
> > | Various options can be envisaged, so some discussion should take place within the TCG in coordination with the Standing Committee on Standards and Processes to determine a possible better scheme.
End of Text
A potential option from ChristopheArviset | |||||||
There might be various ways to define such a nomenclature, here is a possible one:
| ||||||||
Added: | ||||||||
> > | An other option from NormanGray | |||||||
This might be more intricate than necessary. Here is an alternative proposal:
<--
|