Difference between revisions of "ModuleQuestions"
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
(Created page with "== Issues to resolve with the module template == # Module naming convention - I used the heading of the major section of the outline as my title and the module title line as the...") |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Issues to resolve with the module template == | == Issues to resolve with the module template == | ||
− | # Module naming convention - I used the heading of the major section of the outline as my title and the module title line as the subtitle. That provides something of a map that people can follow from the on-line outline to the material and back. Do we want to standardize on that? If so then for example one of the | + | # Module naming convention - I used the heading of the major section of the outline as my title and the module title line as the subtitle. That provides something of a map that people can follow from the on-line outline to the material and back. Do we want to standardize on that? If so then for example one of the sub-modules of this section would have the title Agency Requirements, and the sub-title NSF. |
# Module author - Just me? What about reviewer's? Co-authors, etc.? | # Module author - Just me? What about reviewer's? Co-authors, etc.? | ||
# Module organization - I just used NSIDC, but should I provide contact information? If this were a journal article I would... | # Module organization - I just used NSIDC, but should I provide contact information? If this were a journal article I would... | ||
+ | # Is it acceptable to eliminate redundant pages - i.e., how flexible do we want to be in following the template? | ||
+ | # What domains and agencies do we want to be complete and specific on? Where do we draw the line? (i.e., NIH? DOE? ???) | ||
+ | # On the references and resources page - how self-contained do we want/need to be? How often will we need to update these pages? | ||
+ | # Now how do we pick which other modules are relevant? | ||
# At this point I think perhaps a writer's guide is indeed necessary | # At this point I think perhaps a writer's guide is indeed necessary |
Revision as of 11:13, August 31, 2011
Issues to resolve with the module template
- Module naming convention - I used the heading of the major section of the outline as my title and the module title line as the subtitle. That provides something of a map that people can follow from the on-line outline to the material and back. Do we want to standardize on that? If so then for example one of the sub-modules of this section would have the title Agency Requirements, and the sub-title NSF.
- Module author - Just me? What about reviewer's? Co-authors, etc.?
- Module organization - I just used NSIDC, but should I provide contact information? If this were a journal article I would...
- Is it acceptable to eliminate redundant pages - i.e., how flexible do we want to be in following the template?
- What domains and agencies do we want to be complete and specific on? Where do we draw the line? (i.e., NIH? DOE? ???)
- On the references and resources page - how self-contained do we want/need to be? How often will we need to update these pages?
- Now how do we pick which other modules are relevant?
- At this point I think perhaps a writer's guide is indeed necessary