Hi -
I'm forwarding (with his permission) some thoughts from Rob Philpott on
KMIP document categories, in response to Matt Ball's posting on this
topic.
Regards,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Philpott, Robert
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 2:05 PM
To: Griffin, Robert; 'Matthew.Ball@Sun.COM'; 'drsecure@us.ibm.com'
Cc: Philpott, Robert
Subject: RE: [kmip] Clarification for document categories
Depends on a few things. Separating types of documents into folders is
a GOOD thing for helping folks quickly locate stuff. Also, in
mature/active TC's, you may end up with hundreds/thousands of docs and
keeping things organized as you go along is a plus.
Many TC's don't create/post minutes as distinct documents; they just
send them as text emails. If minutes are always going to be sent as
posted documents, then yes, a Minutes folder makes sense. If they will
sometimes be sent as email text or as documents attached to emails (i.e.
not specifically posted as a document), then a folder may not make
sense. In TC's where different people take minutes from
meeting-to-meeting, you might have different preferences for how the
minute-taker wants to do them. If you want to standardize on posting
minutes as unique docs, then, as I said, it makes sense to put them in
their own folder. I'd put both draft and approved minutes there and use
a naming convention to make clear which is which.
Since there are various forms of other "input documents/proposals",
"drafts", and "specs", perhaps using folders that align with how the TC
process and the document naming guidelines defines them makes sense.
This isn't really much different from what Matt proposed. There's
already a "Standards" folder, which should only hold approved OASIS
standards, IMO (the KMIP folder would be empty for now). Matt proposed
a "Drafts" folder. I suggest renaming "Drafts" to something like
"Working Documents" and using it to hold Working Drafts, Committee
Drafts, Public Review Drafts, and any other posted documents including
"proposals".
I would create separate "Committee Specs" and "Errata" folders to hold
the approved CS docs and approved errata docs. I'm basing this on the
TC definitions of these 2 groups:
* "OASIS Draft Deliverable" means any of the following: Working Drafts,
Committee Drafts and Public Review Drafts.
* "OASIS Final Deliverable" means any of the following: Committee
Specifications, OASIS Standards and Approved Errata.
If TC members might produce documents that are explanatory in nature and
not officially blessed by the TC, then a folder for "Outreach Materials"
may be in order.
Note that you can also create nested folders. So you could get more
granular under "Working Documents" (or "Drafts" if you don't rename it).
For example: "Working Documents/Committee Drafts" and "Working
Documents/Public Review Drafts".
Rob Philpott
RSA, the Security Division of EMC
Senior Technologist | e-Mail: robert.philpott@rsa.com | Office: (781)
515-7115 | Mobile: (617) 510-0893