[OSGeo-Standards] glossary discussion on osgeo-standards ....

Cameron Shorter cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Tue Oct 15 11:52:21 PDT 2019

OSGeo Board, OSGeo Discuss,

I'd like to introduce you to this proposal that Ron and Reese have been 
developing on the OSGeo Standards email list, which I think should fit 
under the legal structure of an OSGeo Committee.

I have vague recollections that setting up a committee requires board 
approval? I've found some old tips on running a committee here: 

Comments welcomed.

On 15/10/19 4:47 pm, Ronald Tse wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
> Thank you for the suggestions! I have updated the proposal to reflect 
> your comments below.
> I would be honored to help with terminology management at OSGeo. Can’t 
> speak for Reese but with his leadership in already doing terminology 
> cleanup on Felicity’s sheet, he seems pretty committed already :-)
> Ron
> ———
> Recommendations for OSGeo terminology management
> 1. Establish a terminology management group in OSGeo.
> ISO/TC 211, IEC Electropedia and OGC all have one for terminology 
> management. The existence of this group is crucial to the success 
> of the OSGeo terminology database. It will play two essential roles:
> a) As the gatekeeper of terms to ensure quality checks of contributions
> b) As the seat of central terminology knowledge for alignment of terms 
> and concepts. To facilitate the flow of terminology knowledge 
> to terminology authors and users.
> It would be helpful to involve representation from ISO/TC 211 and OGC 
> in this group, in order to leverage their experience in 
> terminology. Such experience will be useful in situations such as 
> alerting on cross-organization alignment of concepts or term duplication.
> An email list shall be setup for this group for internal communication.
> 2. Establish a terms of reference for terminology management.
> For the terminology management group, a terms of reference should be 
> produced so that the steps for approval and data quality requirements 
> are clear. This should be openly shared with contributors so they are 
> clear on acceptance criteria.
> Contributors may propose changes to the terminology database at any 
> time. The terminology management group shall discuss and approve or 
> disapprove of the proposal within a reasonable timeframe. This 
> practice is in-line with the open source, change-based, 
> rapid iteration mantra, similar to OpenSSL.
> For releases, the group shall convene periodically, such as every 4-6 
> months, to discuss previously decided proposals, governance 
> or technical issues related to terminology management.
> The method of submitting change requests shall also be determined and 
> announced so that contributors understand the necessary processes and 
> timeline.
> 3. Establish an online terminology database presence.
> Terminology isn’t useful until people use them, which means people 
> need to first know they exist and what they mean. Geolexica is 
> an initiative that currently serves ISO/TC 211’s terminology 
> management group in making its multi-lingual geographic information 
> terminology available on the internet (https://www.geolexica.org). We 
> propose to use https://osgeo.geolexica.org/ to serve OSGeo in managing 
> its terminology database. Geolexica not only serves human-readable 
> concepts and terms, but also serves in machine-readable JSON, allowing 
> APIs to directly consume the content.
> The structure of Geolexica is designed for efficiency with streamlined 
> management and operations. Terms are stored in structured data (YAML) 
> files, and are directly deployable to the website. The website 
> operates according to best practices, and is served as a static 
> website with dynamic search functionality. Security and performance 
> have always been key considerations.
> For terms that originate from other authoritative terminology 
> databases, such as those from ISO or OGC, a linkage shall be 
> established from the OSGeo terminology database back to the source.
> 4. Use an issue tracker with source code management functionality as 
> an open communication platform (e.g. GitHub).
> The issue tracker is used to perform two-way communication between 
> OSGeo members and the contributors. This requires every contributor to 
> at least have an account, which helps minimize spam. The source code 
> management functionality is used to manage terminology data in a 
> machine-useable way.
> There are generally two types of contributors:
> a) those who suggest changes via textual description, and
> b) those who suggest changes but can also format the desired content 
> in the data format used by the terminology database.
> People can easily help out with the former in formatting the changes 
> into a proper data structure change. This allows the 
> terminology management group to directly approve, merge and deploy the 
> proposed term modifications (and creations, deletions), all made 
> effective with a single click.
> 5. Allow easy feedback from terminology users.
> To minimize friction in the feedback process, for every term offered 
> in the OSGeo terminology pages we can offer a “propose new term” and 
> “propose changes to this term" buttons. This allows user to directly 
> go to the issue platform (e.g. GitHub) to make the suggested changes.
> A “contributors guide” document will greatly help these people make 
> the proper suggestions and have them formatted correctly.
> 6. Initial load and data cleanup.
> The initial load of the terms will involve a bulk load from the 
> cleaned terms and definitions that Felicity has compiled. Geolexica 
> could easily handle the initial conversion from table format into the 
> desired structured data format.
> The cleanup process has already been started by Reese Plews, convenor 
> of the TMG at ISO/TC 211.
> _____________________________________
> Ronald Tse
> Ribose Inc.
>> On Oct 10, 2019, at 3:34 PM, Cameron Shorter 
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Ron,
>> I really like your proposal. It looks very practical, should address 
>> quality requirements, and should be relatively light weight to 
>> manage. Some comments/suggestions:
>> * You might want to mention the approach to your first load of terms, 
>> which probably should involve a bulk load from a derivative of the 
>> terms that Felicity has compiled.
>> * I suggest we set up an email list to discuss terms. OSGeo can 
>> provide that for us, and I can coordinate that, once we have agreed 
>> on our approach.
>> * I suggest that an updating the glossary be tied to a periodic 
>> event, at least annually. I think we should tie in with the OSGeoLive 
>> annual build cycle for this.
>> * You haven't mentioned https://osgeo.geolexica.org/ 
>> <https://osgeo.geolexica.org/> in your description. I assume that 
>> would be part of the solution? If so, I suggest mentioning it.
>> * Another project I'm helping start up is 
>> https://thegooddocsproject.dev/ <https://thegooddocsproject.dev/> 
>> (Writing templates to make good docs for open source projects). I 
>> expect that the solution you are proposing would be valuable for a 
>> wide variety of domains, and should be captured as best practices in 
>> TheGoodDocsProject. At some point in the future, I'm hoping that you 
>> might provide a generic version of your suggestions for others to 
>> follow too.
>> Feel free to add your ideas below into the wiki at: 
>> https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeolive/wiki/Glossary%20terms
>> (Maybe add "DRAFT" at the top, until we have the process set up.)
>> * Ron and Reese, I'm hoping that you both will continue to provide 
>> the leadership and stewardship of the community as it grows? Your 
>> advice has been great to date.
>> Warm regards, Cameron
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Standards at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards

Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant

M +61 (0) 419 142 254

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20191016/6e629f00/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Standards mailing list