Editing Commons Steering Committee Workspace

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in.

Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 129: Line 129:
== Minutes ==
== Minutes ==
Commons Governance Meeting minutes for Tuesday, February 19, 2013 2pm EST
Karl Benedict
Bruce Caron
Erin Robinson
Carol B. Meyer
David Bassendine
Reid Boehm
On the agenda:
Looking at final governing document
talking about selection of a style guide
How do the commons content steering committee get selected?
• Type-reps defined (3 of the 4 types)
• Work-group liaison or  Ad-Hoc team ?
• Steering Committee will consist of type reps or their designees
• If the commons actively evolves we may want to have a larger group but, make sure don’t have to continuously explain details of the process
• Distributed governance makes less work for committee
• Products and services  making a move towards more towards administrative functions
• Having the steering committee represented by the content members themselves
• include the Vice Pres (executive committee visibility and specialists representatives)
• They select a chair from within the group
Also- talking about some kind of a style guide
• Exemplars suggested- science or common journal style guide
• Linked three to the bottom of the Gooogle Docs Doc
• Each of these are combo of submission guides and workflow plus manuscript format for submission
• We will need to adopt something similar- workflow- may differ for different content areas
• (ex: posters different than manuscripts or whitepapers)
• Workflows- need to not be too divergent- considering Drupal cm. structure
• Templates- to fit within the capabilities of the content management systems?
• David- you could start with a default template and then diverge only when necessary
• Return, review, publish- content editors could have their own mix – who they select as editors but fitting within a more standardized workflow.
• workflow issues recently the content was being developed quickly enough that it wasn’t appropriate for that type of content
• The white papers may go through more rigorous treatment
• As people choose not to revise- how long do we keep it- how long til we throw it away
• Maybe some issue with storage later
• Tag that an administrator can specify that only an administrator could change?
• Probably the lightweight way to go.
• Instead of the workflow being defined by the editors – we may want to have a limited number of workflows associated with the content types
• Editors could choose from a specific number of content types three degrees of strength to acceptance- Scenario for content like meeting content
• Tagging approach work for the micro article type- we could go for the tagging route and see how that works- leave it to the content editors to tag-
• Versioning or version comparison- gets to the content side of things- philosophically- do we want to push more content into the management system as data or as pdfs
• Preference to submitted content- usability and reusability
• Contention the website would make it more search able than just the linked pdf
• PDF is less able to be manipulated
• Part of the idea is to move away from the PDF to actual HTML
• PDF becomes more of the presentation layer
• Decision to have steering committee pick the style guide- have the engagement from the content area editors
Action item:
• Start the selection of the steering committee
• put this on the agenda for the next executive committee meeting
Next meeting is TBD → arrangement of the steering committee by executive committee.
Meeting adjourned.
Commons Governance Meeting Minutes
Commons Governance Meeting Minutes


'''Bold''' | ''Italic'' | [[Wiki Page Name| Text to show]] | [http://external link.com Text to show]
==Heading== | * Bullets list | # Number List | sign ~~~ | sign and date ~~~~

More Wiki Help
Please note that all contributions to Federation of Earth Science Information Partners are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 (see Federation of Earth Science Information Partners:Copyrights for details). If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. DO NOT SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION!

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)
Personal tools