[Lexicon] GRASS / OSGeo Geolexica
Cameron Shorter
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Wed Nov 25 10:58:14 PST 2020
+lexicon at lists.osgeo.org <lexicon at lists.osgeo.org>
Looping in the OSGeo lexicon list (which has the other Glossary pilot
participants).
Hi Vaclav,
Sorry for the delayed response. I was interrupted while responding, then
this fell under a bunch of todos.
Yes, I'm very hopeful that our community and processes we are developing
will help you folks in GRASS, although I want to be careful we don't over
promise.
We also have plenty of questions in this space - but we also have
commitment and expertise to work through these problems.
Re "what process will look like?":
I'd suggest:
* Ankita and Naini (tech writers) can help review how your terms are
written and provide feedback if needed. Reese also from OGC and ISO/TC211
who has deep experience in writing spatial terms.
* We are standing up an OSGeo glossary software using Glossarist open
source software. We can either include GRASS terms in there, and harmonize
with existing terms, or stand up a separate GRASS glossary (see discussion
below). Ron, the main software author should be able to help with this.
* We should set up a governance process. We want to write generic processes
that others can customize. I'm hoping the GRASS project can work with us to
help pilot that.
Timeframe for this will be to have something ready by ~ February/March 2021
Further from our slack chat
<https://join.slack.com/t/thegooddocs/shared_invite/enQtODkyNjI5MDc0NjE0LTUyNGFiZmU1MjIzNDMwN2E3NmQwODQwZmRkYWI5MDhlMzdjYzg4Nzg4YjM3ODA0NGE4MTgyYzdkMGViMTI2MDM>
(in case you haven't seen it):
cameronshorter <https://app.slack.com/team/UKTGLQNGG> 7:17 AM
<https://thegooddocs.slack.com/archives/C019A1EQJMC/p1606162670012500>
This is really valuable feedback @Codrina Maria Ilie
<https://thegooddocs.slack.com/team/U01ABLZMV7E>. Thankyou for coordinating
this. I believe we have enough information in here already that we could
set up a GRASS collection of terms. As we are only doing a pilot, we could
be using dummy terms, but using these GRASS terms is so much better. It is
going to help us uncover use cases. In particular, GRASS have highlighted a
use case I hadn't considered - where the same concept is called different
things by different organizations. (In GRASS's case, it is difference
between ESRI and GRASS). It seems obvious when we write it down.
We have the option of creating a GRASS collection inside the OSGeo terms,
or to stand up a separate GRASS glossary, and then we can work through the
painful use case of trying to rationalize two glossaries. (Which I think is
a use case worth pursuing) . It shouldn't be too much effort from the GRASS
community, but will be a lot of effort for us around setting up the
processes for integrating glossaries. (edited)
Codrina Maria Ilie <https://app.slack.com/team/U01ABLZMV7E> 7:53 AM
<https://thegooddocs.slack.com/archives/C019A1EQJMC/p1606164824018800>
Wonderful! I am happy I could help a bit! I am curious, why do you think it
would be a better approach to have 2 glossaries - OSGeo and GRASS - instead
of a collection inside the “mother” glossary? Are there some technical
limitations that I don’t foresee given the maturity/longevity and
complexity of GRASS terminology? If, and hopefully, the Lexicon plan is
successful, then, in time, more and more projects will join. Will they join
as OSGeo collections or independent glossaries, following the GRASS
example? Are there specific benefits for the project for to have a
glossary and not be a collection ?
cameronshorter <https://app.slack.com/team/UKTGLQNGG> 12:20 PM
<https://thegooddocs.slack.com/archives/C019A1EQJMC/p1606180831023200>
@Codrina Maria Ilie <https://thegooddocs.slack.com/team/U01ABLZMV7E> There
Pros and Cons for both approaches. From a pilot perspective, it will be
valuable to try and get two glossaries to talk with each other (hence my
suggestion of two glossaries). From an OSGeo/GRASS perspective - it will be
more work up front to get alignment around terms, but will likey be better
later to have all the terms under the one OSGeo glossary. Note that what we
decide now in our pilot can be changed later.
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 at 13:38, Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
>
> I'm curious how this will turn out. I hope this formalization will help
> the GRASS GIS community with some renaming/terminology issues we are now
> discussing.
>
> I subscribed to the mailing list. Feel free to continue the conversation
> there or include other people here. I'm still unclear on what the process
> would be. How do you want to proceed with the resources Codrina and I
> collected?
>
> Best,
> Vaclav
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 1:27 PM Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Codrina and Vaclav,
>> This GRASS use case is excellent and would be really helpful for us to
>> use to test our software and processes within our glossaries pilot.
>> I have more I'd like to add to this thread, and would like to loop in the
>> other glossary pilot participants.
>> Vaclav (and Codrina), do you mind if I introduce you and this thread to
>> the public osgeo lexicon email list?
>> Cheers, Cameron
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 at 23:28, Codrina Maria Ilie <codrina at geo-spatial.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Vaclav,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the resources!
>>> (...)
>>>
>>> I did add to our thread Cameron Shorter, that I mentioned earlier and
>>> Ankita, an experienced tech writer volunteering for the OSGeo glossary.
>>> They are much more experienced and thus can provide a clearer insight
>>> into the topic.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Codrina
>>>
>>> On 23/11/2020 06:26, Vaclav Petras wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 7:32 AM Codrina Maria Ilie
>>> > <codrina at geo-spatial.org <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi, Vaclav,
>>> >
>>> > I hope all is good on your side.
>>> >
>>> > We are trying to advance with the pilot glossaries wihtin OSGeo
>>> and I
>>> > was looking for resources where GRASS GIS terms are written down,
>>> > defined and/or discussed in the attempt to include them.
>>> >
>>> > I put together these resources:
>>> >
>>> > [1] https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_Translation_Glossary
>>> > <https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_Translation_Glossary>
>>> > [2]
>>> >
>>> https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Terminology_comparison_between_ArcGIS_and_GRASS_GIS
>>> > <
>>> https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Terminology_comparison_between_ArcGIS_and_GRASS_GIS
>>> >
>>> > [3] https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_7_Terminology
>>> > <https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_7_Terminology>
>>> >
>>> > Are there other wikis or docs or repositories that I've missed?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Mostly valid even now:
>>> >
>>> > https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_6_Terminology
>>> > <https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_6_Terminology>
>>> >
>>> > With some old discussion and attempts for rename:
>>> >
>>> > https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_7_Terminology
>>> > <https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_7_Terminology>
>>> >
>>> > Some sections are terms with definitions:
>>> >
>>> > https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GIS_Concepts
>>> > <https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GIS_Concepts>
>>> >
>>> > The above has links to documentation which sometimes has definitions,
>>> > most notably:
>>> >
>>> > https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/rasterintro.html
>>> > <https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/rasterintro.html>
>>> > https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/vectorintro.html
>>> > <https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/vectorintro.html>
>>> > https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/raster3dintro.html
>>> > <https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/raster3dintro.html>
>>> > https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/temporalintro.html
>>> > <https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/temporalintro.html>
>>> > https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/projectionintro.html
>>> > <https://grass.osgeo.org/grass78/manuals/projectionintro.html>
>>> >
>>> > Even more, but mostly duplication of above:
>>> >
>>> > https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Location_and_Mapsets
>>> > <https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Location_and_Mapsets>
>>> > https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_raster_semantics
>>> > <https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_raster_semantics>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Probably, it would be best if you take out Anna, Vero and Moritz from
>>> > the email thread and include whomever you think should be part of the
>>> > conversation from your side.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Any suggestion is highly appreciated.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Codrina
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 09/11/2020 12:43, Codrina Maria Ilie wrote:
>>> > > Hi, Vaclav,
>>> > >
>>> > > It seems that asynchronous communication works best for me as
>>> > well in
>>> > > these times. As the end of the year is approaching, tasks just
>>> > keep on
>>> > > pilling up.
>>> > >
>>> > > I will do my best to answer you questions, yet - if it is OK
>>> with
>>> > you -
>>> > > I'd also like to invite into our conversation Cameron Shorter.
>>> He
>>> > is a
>>> > > technical writer and mentor within The Good Docs Project [1]
>>> and the
>>> > > main initiator of this initiative within OSGeo.
>>> > >
>>> > > Now, regarding your questions, for (1) and (2) - GRASS GIS would
>>> > become
>>> > > a pilot project for the OSGeo glossary Geolexica.
>>> > >
>>> > > At this point, OSGeo Geolexica [2] is populated with terms that
>>> have
>>> > > been gathered over time by the GeoForAll group. The list is of
>>> > course
>>> > > far from exhaustive, but it is a good start. The terms you see
>>> there
>>> > > have already been curated by the tech writers from the Lexicon
>>> > > Committee. You can take a look here [3] to get an idea on how
>>> > things
>>> > > evolved. It is a spreadsheet because the initial GeoForAll list
>>> > was a
>>> > > spreadsheet and it was faster to start as such, to get the ball
>>> > rolling.
>>> > >
>>> > > Being a pilot project means that a collection will be added in
>>> OSGeo
>>> > > Geolexica - lets say, named GRASS GIS - and you will be able to
>>> > select
>>> > > terms from the OSGeo "main" glossary to include into the GRASS
>>> GIS
>>> > > collection. Working further, you can propose new terms relevant
>>> to
>>> > > OSGeo, propose changes and opening discussions on existing ones.
>>> > >
>>> > > Technically speaking, for all these actions, we will have a
>>> > bullet list
>>> > > howto for the Geolexica desktop interface we'll use [4].
>>> > Conceptually
>>> > > speaking, regarding how a debate on a specific term is lead and
>>> > how a
>>> > > conclusion is reached - Cameron can help us both better
>>> > understand the
>>> > > process.
>>> > >
>>> > > Regarding question (3), it would be something like 2h /week
>>> > initially.
>>> > > Our volunteer tech writers need to understand the project, what
>>> > are your
>>> > > requirements, what are the processes you normally use to define
>>> > GRASS
>>> > > terms, what happens when a term become obsolete etc. Usually,
>>> for
>>> > that
>>> > > it's easier to have a call because it's faster, but it's not
>>> > mandatory,
>>> > > of course. We have a Slack channel we use for the Lexicon
>>> > committee, you
>>> > > can join that, or do it in a mail thread, whatever works.
>>> > >
>>> > > I hope I managed to shed a bit of light on your questions. Is it
>>> > OK for
>>> > > you if you also cc Cameron (cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>>> > <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>) in your next email?
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Cheers,
>>> > > Codrina
>>> > >
>>> > > [1] https://thegooddocsproject.dev/ <
>>> https://thegooddocsproject.dev/>
>>> > > [2] https://osgeo.geolexica.org/ <https://osgeo.geolexica.org/>
>>> > > [3]
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1keonRLT3chmqlRZsMMF9UaCI_vzNEHmJx6t9LB3jBjM/edit#gid=32744342
>>> > <
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1keonRLT3chmqlRZsMMF9UaCI_vzNEHmJx6t9LB3jBjM/edit#gid=32744342
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > [4] https://github.com/glossarist/glossarist-desktop/
>>> > <https://github.com/glossarist/glossarist-desktop/>
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On 03/11/2020 06:20, Vaclav Petras wrote:
>>> > >> Thank you for the explanation, Codrina. I especially like your
>>> > point 4
>>> > >> about translations. I have some more thoughts, but I will focus
>>> > just
>>> > >> on what should be the next step for us.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (1) Since standardization/harmonization is a goal (or the
>>> > goal?), my
>>> > >> question is how I or GRASS GIS should approach this? There is a
>>> > >> precedence in icon themes which seems to still work out well,
>>> > but this
>>> > >> is much more complex. A recent usability survey for GRASS GIS
>>> > >> suggested that working on terminology might be a good next
>>> step for
>>> > >> GRASS GIS and that's of course not the first time this was
>>> > brought up.
>>> > >> Of course, if that would be straightforward, we would not be
>>> having
>>> > >> this discussion in the first place.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Taking the first item from the ArcGIS vs GRASS GIS list as an
>>> > example
>>> > >> (which is sufficiently interesting and controversial :-),
>>> should
>>> > GRASS
>>> > >> GIS project now start arguing for its term /map/ (or /mapping/)
>>> > to be
>>> > >> used for basic unit of geographic data as /mapping/ is a more
>>> > >> mathematically fitting term for what many use a
>>> > visualization-oriented
>>> > >> GIS term /layer/ which usually refers to one of flat components
>>> > of a
>>> > >> bigger object? Or should we go ahead and prepare for a big
>>> > rename of
>>> > >> /raster map/ to /image/ and /vector map/ to /feature
>>> collection/ or
>>> > >> whatever is the most popular term for that these days. Or
>>> perhaps
>>> > >> both? I'm to get a clear sense of what is expected from us.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (2) Regardless of the answer to the above question, it seems
>>> to me
>>> > >> that there might be value in including the /current/ terms from
>>> > GRASS
>>> > >> GIS. Even in the scenario where they would become obsolete, it
>>> > would
>>> > >> be good as a reference. There seems to be a way to depreciate
>>> > terms.
>>> > >> However, I don't see multiple definitions for one term (which,
>>> > e.g.,
>>> > >> /map/ or /layer/ would need) or project-specific definitions
>>> > marked as
>>> > >> such, although some of the current definitions seem to be
>>> > specific to
>>> > >> specific projects.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (3) Finally, it is not clear to me what time commitment is
>>> > required to
>>> > >> participate in this. As there is no immediate benefit, it seems
>>> > like
>>> > >> something which is hard to do without direct funding. What is
>>> the
>>> > >> system to get "your voice heard" with limited time commitment?
>>> > Do the
>>> > >> volunteer technical writers somewho fit into this?
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Asynchronous email works better for me at this point. We can
>>> call
>>> > >> later if needed.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Best,
>>> > >> Vaclav
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Sun, Nov 1, 2020 at 3:33 PM Codrina Maria Ilie
>>> > >> <codrina at geo-spatial.org <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org>
>>> > <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org>>>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Hi, Vaclav,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Thanks for getting back to me.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> The initiative is doing both, creating a terminology pool
>>> and
>>> > >> allowing
>>> > >> standardization and harmonization of terms across all OSGeo
>>> > >> projects, as
>>> > >> well as outside OSGeo. Your work highlighting the
>>> > differences between
>>> > >> GRASS and ArcGIS terminology is perfect to demonstrate the
>>> need
>>> > >> for it
>>> > >> in the geospatial field.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> There are several aspects that - I think - makes this
>>> initiative
>>> > >> relevant:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (1) we are aligned with OGC and ISO/TC 211. Rob Atkinson,
>>> who is
>>> > >> involved in the development, maintenance and research
>>> around
>>> > >> sharing of
>>> > >> 'definitions' in general and Reese Plews, who is the
>>> > convenor of the
>>> > >> ISO/TC 211 Terminology Maintenance Group (TMG) - are both
>>> > part of the
>>> > >> Lexicon Committee in OSGeo. This helps us with
>>> > cross-organization
>>> > >> alignment of concepts or avoiding term duplication so
>>> > hopefully, in
>>> > >> time, there will be no more need for terms comparison
>>> across
>>> > >> solutions,
>>> > >> organizations, projects etc.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> We've also reached out to EU Re3gistry [1] trying to link
>>> to
>>> > their
>>> > >> efforts as well, but without much success until now. I
>>> > suppose this
>>> > >> would somehow exceed their EC requirements and
>>> responsibilities.
>>> > >> We'll see.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (2) defining terms in a structure way, following best
>>> > practices - for
>>> > >> this particular aspect we are working with 2 volunteer
>>> technical
>>> > >> writers.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (3) we are using Geolexica [2], [3] for the actual
>>> > development of the
>>> > >> glossary - which is an Open Source solution commissioned by
>>> > ISO/TC211
>>> > >> specifically for their glossary [4]. Basically, the
>>> > terminology is
>>> > >> stored in a gitlab repository to which an editor connects
>>> to
>>> > >> through an
>>> > >> easy interface using hers/his git username. Of course, not
>>> > >> everyone can
>>> > >> edit everything, there are some roles assigned etc. etc.
>>> but
>>> > these
>>> > >> details are not relevant at this point.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (4) it helps with the software and documentation creation
>>> and
>>> > >> translations. Geolexica supports multiple languages
>>> (example
>>> > from
>>> > >> ISO/TC
>>> > >> 211 [5]), so if you are a translator for Arabic, you can
>>> > look for the
>>> > >> term in English and see if there is an official
>>> translation to
>>> > >> use. If
>>> > >> not, you can propose one. Not to mention the help for new
>>> > >> documentation
>>> > >> writers/translators volunteers that have one stop-shop for
>>> > terms used
>>> > >> within the filed and within the specific software that they
>>> > work at.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> (5) this way of working with terminology allows all kinds
>>> of
>>> > >> automatic
>>> > >> integrations, such as inherit terms already defined and
>>> accepted
>>> > >> existing in the foundation glossary into one's
>>> documentations,
>>> > >> inserting
>>> > >> glossary-like functionalities into the software etc.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I could go on a bit longer, but this email is shameless
>>> > long, for
>>> > >> which
>>> > >> fact I apologise :) I hope, though, that it gives a clearer
>>> > view on
>>> > >> what
>>> > >> we're trying to do and why.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> To resume, we want to build up and then maintain the OSGeo
>>> > glossary -
>>> > >> that is standardized and harmonized with the works of
>>> specific
>>> > >> mandated
>>> > >> geo-institutions - and we can only do it with support from
>>> the
>>> > >> community.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Please, don't hesitate to ask me if you have any other
>>> > questions. We
>>> > >> can
>>> > >> even set a call, in hopes of escaping long emails. :)
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Cheers,
>>> > >> Codrina
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> [1] https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/solution/re3gistry
>>> > <https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/solution/re3gistry>
>>> > >> [2] https://github.com/geolexica <
>>> https://github.com/geolexica>
>>> > >> [3] https://osgeo.geolexica.org/ <
>>> https://osgeo.geolexica.org/>
>>> > >> [4] https://isotc211.geolexica.org/
>>> > <https://isotc211.geolexica.org/>
>>> > >> [5] https://isotc211.geolexica.org/stats/
>>> > <https://isotc211.geolexica.org/stats/>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On 01/11/2020 05:50, Vaclav Petras wrote:
>>> > >> > Hi Codrina,
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Thanks for reaching out to us. I don't understand how
>>> this is
>>> > >> related to
>>> > >> > project-specific concepts or terminology. Is this just
>>> > trying to
>>> > >> put all
>>> > >> > terms into one pool or is the idea to also standardize
>>> > the terms
>>> > >> across
>>> > >> > projects? For example, I created
>>> /Terminology//comparison
>>> > between
>>> > >> ArcGIS
>>> > >> > and GRASS GIS/ which shows some of the issues of
>>> different
>>> > >> terminologies.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Best,
>>> > >> > Vaclav
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Terminology_comparison_between_ArcGIS_and_GRASS_GIS
>>> > <
>>> https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Terminology_comparison_between_ArcGIS_and_GRASS_GIS
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 2:01 PM Codrina Maria Ilie
>>> > >> > <codrina at geo-spatial.org <mailto:
>>> codrina at geo-spatial.org>
>>> > <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org>>
>>> > >> <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org
>>> > <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org> <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org
>>> > <mailto:codrina at geo-spatial.org>>>>
>>> > >> wrote:
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Hi, Anna, Vero, Vaclav and Moritz,
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > I hope you all - as well as your close ones - are
>>> > healthy and
>>> > >> OK during
>>> > >> > these complicated times. Romania, like the rest of
>>> > Europe, is
>>> > >> severely
>>> > >> > hit by the second pandemic wave and the authorities
>>> > seem to
>>> > >> be worried
>>> > >> > more about political capital when deciding on
>>> potentially
>>> > >> life saving
>>> > >> > restrictions.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > I am writing to you - at the suggestion of Markus -
>>> > >> regarding an
>>> > >> > initiative within OSGeo that you might have heard at
>>> > the AGM
>>> > >> or saw the
>>> > >> > email below sent to the OSGeo discuss list - OSGeo
>>> > Geolexica.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > What we - the Lexicon Committee - are trying to do
>>> > now is set
>>> > >> up some
>>> > >> > pilot glossaries for specific OSGeo projects that
>>> can
>>> > feed
>>> > >> from the
>>> > >> > OSGeo Geolexica [1].
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > I was wondering if any of you would be interested to
>>> > >> contribute on
>>> > >> > behalf of GRASS, or any other of OSGeo projects
>>> you're
>>> > >> working on. That
>>> > >> > would translate into activities like reviewing terms
>>> > from the
>>> > >> OSGeo
>>> > >> > glossary and deciding whether they should be
>>> included
>>> > in your
>>> > >> pilot or
>>> > >> > identify new terms that are specific for you.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > The initiative is built together with OGC and
>>> ISO/TC211.
>>> > >> We've also
>>> > >> > reached out to EU Re3gistry trying to link to their
>>> > efforts
>>> > >> as well,
>>> > >> > but
>>> > >> > without much success until now. I suppose this would
>>> > somehow
>>> > >> exceed
>>> > >> > their EC requirements and responsibilities. We'll
>>> see.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > More details on the initiative are in our Manifesto
>>> > [2] or
>>> > >> on the
>>> > >> > Lexicon Committee wiki [3]. Of course, if you have
>>> any
>>> > >> questions, feel
>>> > >> > free to ask away.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > So, please let me know if any of this is of
>>> interest and
>>> > >> also, of
>>> > >> > course, if your time allows any engagements.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Cheers,
>>> > >> > Codrina
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > [1] https://osgeo.geolexica.org/
>>> > <https://osgeo.geolexica.org/>
>>> > >> > [2]
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fjrl34ErnYammel9WmvXJ3rMWFANjoSiiGyyNSYOXUg/edit
>>> > <
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fjrl34ErnYammel9WmvXJ3rMWFANjoSiiGyyNSYOXUg/edit
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > [3] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Lexicon_Committee
>>> > <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Lexicon_Committee>
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Hi all,
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > I am writing to let you know of a new initiative
>>> > within our
>>> > >> community -
>>> > >> > the OSGeo Glossary - led by the Lexicon committee
>>> (in
>>> > >> formation) with
>>> > >> > the scope of defining and managing geospatial terms
>>> > across
>>> > >> communities.
>>> > >> > First operative steps have already been made with
>>> > setting up
>>> > >> OSGeo
>>> > >> > Geolexica [1] for managing the lexicon database, as
>>> > well as
>>> > >> an initial
>>> > >> > load of terms that was done by a bulk load from
>>> cleaned
>>> > >> terms and
>>> > >> > definitions compiled by the GeoForAll group.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > The work is done in collaboration with folks from
>>> > ISO/TC 211,
>>> > >> OGC and
>>> > >> > The Good Docs Project [2] that have joined the
>>> Lexicon
>>> > >> committee, which
>>> > >> > is very constructive given their decades long
>>> > experience in
>>> > >> > terminology,
>>> > >> > as well as helping us with cross-organization
>>> > alignment of
>>> > >> concepts or
>>> > >> > avoiding term duplication.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Gracefully helping us with the groundwork are two
>>> > experienced
>>> > >> technical
>>> > >> > writers that I’d like to introduce to our community,
>>> > Ankita
>>> > >> and Naini -
>>> > >> > in cc. Their contributions will support us in doing
>>> a
>>> > clean,
>>> > >> sharp job
>>> > >> > when it comes to the actual process of glossary
>>> > construction.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > A next big step for the Lexicon Committee is setting
>>> > up pilot
>>> > >> glossary
>>> > >> > projects for specific OSGeo projects, irrespective
>>> of
>>> > their
>>> > >> status,
>>> > >> > incubated, in the process or community. So, if this
>>> > could
>>> > >> be of
>>> > >> > interest
>>> > >> > to you, please let me, Cameron, Ankita or Naini know
>>> > or by
>>> > >> joining and
>>> > >> > presenting yourself on the Lexicon mailing list [3]
>>> > or Slack
>>> > >> channel
>>> > >> > [4].
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Cheers and stay safe,
>>> > >> > Codrina
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > [1] https://osgeo.geolexica.org/
>>> > <https://osgeo.geolexica.org/>
>>> > >> > [2] https://thegooddocsproject.dev/
>>> > <https://thegooddocsproject.dev/>
>>> > >> > [3]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/lexicon
>>> > <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/lexicon>
>>> > >> > [4]
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> https://thegooddocs.slack.com/join/shared_invite/zt-be2gay0m-Ukq_5SI0MHp20IQP3auQjg#/
>>> > <
>>> https://thegooddocs.slack.com/join/shared_invite/zt-be2gay0m-Ukq_5SI0MHp20IQP3auQjg#/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> Technical Writer, Google
>>
>>
>>
--
Cameron Shorter
Technical Writer, Google
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/lexicon/attachments/20201126/fc58690e/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Lexicon
mailing list