[OSGeo-Standards] glossary discussion on osgeo-standards ....
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Thu Oct 24 15:02:18 PDT 2019
Reese, these are questions we can flesh out of the coming weeks. I
propose upcoming steps:
* Receive endorsement from OSGeo Board at the next meeting in a week or
so to be officially recognised as an OSGeo committee.
* Set up an OSGeo Lexicon email list (action on me to coordinate)
* Continue fleshing out our draft OSGeo Lexicon process as per here:
* In a few weeks, reach out to OSGeo projects again and invite them to
join our email list and committee. Hopefully pick up a few people.
(action on me)
* Bootstrap our OSGeo Lexicon committee. (Action on me to coordinate,
I'll be leaning on others to step up to chair).
* Refine and agree on our priorities and processes
** Yes, language used will be English, and likely will lead to
translating to other languages in future stages.
On 24/10/19 12:45 pm, rplews at tc211tmg.org wrote:
> thank you for your support but i would like to yield my suggested
> nomination as a chair of this new committee to someone, in my opinion,
> who is more involved with the workings of OSGEO. i do however plan to
> remain active and involved with the workings and discussions of the
> group, hopefully in some type of registered capacity. i am sure there
> are a number of OSGEO members who may be interested in such a position.
> i am not certain if OSGEO has an official working language or not. i
> dont know enough about the demographics of the OSGEO members. i
> hesitate to suggest any language requirements for members of the
> group, however i am assuming that the official fundamental
> terminology entries will be developed and/or harmonized, and
> maintained in english. "approved" terminology entries may then be
> translated by experts of their respective languages, similar to how
> our group in TC211 works. the unique requirements of the group enable
> many opportunities for participation.
> it is difficult to decided without more consultation if this is how
> the group will function but from what you initially were proposing, it
> seems this is a common structure and procedural framework of such a
> there could also be some level of a consensus and feedback, however
> that process "flow" depends upon the operating structure of OSGEO,
> therefore, in my opinion, the chair of the committee should be someone
> from OSGEO.
> i am happy to discuss off list or via telecon at your convenience.
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
M +61 (0) 419 142 254
More information about the Standards