Subject:
|
Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 23 Apr 2003 16:46:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
955 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Kyle McDonald writes:
>
> > Unless I mis-read something, I think this initial group of 5 is
> > the (parent organization) LDraw.org's leadership doing double duty
> > as the initial Ldraw.org Stnadards Comitee for the sole purpose of
> > setting up how the Standards commitee will be chosen. From what I
> > read the real Standards commitee will be chosen sometime in July
> > (pretty aggressive schedule if you ask me.) and its very possible
> > that it may be made up of entirely different people I suppose.
>
> You're mostly right. I suppose the proposal/message wasn't clear enough (and
> this is the part I was afraid of it not being clear enough in, so I tried to
> disclaim it).
I don't think that what Kyle is describing is what I have in mind.
LDraw.org is the natural group to designate that their will be an LSC
committee. The committee is made up of "technically qualified" members. Only
members of LDraw.org that are "technically qualified" and have a desire to be
on the LSC will have their nominations accepted. There is no distinction
between LDraw.org memebers and non-members for acceptance of nominations.
The LSC will operate as an independent body that makes its own decisions about
LDraw file format. It at no time must answer to LDraw.org on decisions about
LDraw file format. It must answer only to itself and members of the community.
The LDraw.org body is in some ways a *political* (in the nicest sense of the
word) organization that provides technical guidance especially in the area of
part creation (a hugely significant task that we probably all take for
granted.) Tim has his role as evangelist (which he does a fine job of.) Steve
has is role as part/creation database, BFC guy (whic he does a fine job of.).
Ahui does a great job as the help desk guy. Jacob has many roles, but most
notably he maintains the web site server. Larry is guilty by association :^)
in the role of advisement.
The LSC is a technical body that will document where we really are, and guide
future changes and enhancements to the status quo.
I'm one of the instigators in the creation of the LSC, because when I started
working on LPub, I was extremely suprised by the decentralized nature of the
understanding of the LDraw file format and the extensions people had made. I
didn't know where to go to get guidance on how to do what I wanted to do in a
community friendly way. Innovation is fine, but best done in ways that fit
nicely with the status quo.
>
> A couple years ago, the four of us posted this message:
> http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/org/ldraw/?n=1183 - sometime following the
> CAD summit, when there was another push to organize LDraw.org. This is quite
> a while before the idea of a standards body came up.
>
> If the proposal implies the leadership group defined there is doing double
> duty as the initial LSC, that's wrong. My rationale is, we have to start
> somewhere with this - and the only defined leadership group stems from that
> post. According to the proposal, the leadership group, which I like to call
> the "4+1" for short, is responsible for setting the LSC in motion. That
> means appointing the initial chairperson and secretary, and holding the
> first elections. The 4+1 members don't make up the LSC, they hold the vote,
> and the LSC is a subcommittee of the 4+1. There could be overlap between the
> two, but the first LSC could in theory be entirely different people. The LSC
> is limited in scope to defining LDraw.org file format standards, nothing more.
Agreed.
>
> > I would think that one of the things up for discussion between now
> > and then may even be the number of people on it, and what qualifications
> > they may need? But I may not have seen something that says otherwise.
>
> Well, the proposal is up for discussion. I honestly think this document is
> 90-100% there. I posted it to get public response and feedback to resolve
> any issues that may be outstanding in it. I also posted it to get interest
> back up in the LSC idea, as well as the idea of more organization for • LDraw.org.
>
> > I guess that also leaves mw wondering though, Who sets up the rules
> > by which this upper level of LDraw.org leadership is chosen/replaced?
> > and operates?
>
> We set them up ourselves originally, because we had to start somewhere. BUT
> - that should be one of the tasks of the 4+1 itself discussing in
> conjunction with the community, to set up a system for LDraw.org leadership.
> Eventually, the system proposed should be put to a vote for ratification,
> and the individuals to fill leadership roles for LDraw.org voted on as well.
>
> > Then again I could be totally out on a limb here. :)
>
> You're right on track. I want to emphasize that - as a community site, we
> need to start somewhere. There needs to be efforts made to end the chaos and
> ambiguity surrounding LDraw.org standards and organization leadership. The
> LSC proposal is intended to do 2 things: solve the issues of forming
> standards, and introduce a need to further define what LDraw.org is and how
> it is led.
Ohhh.... I don't agree that your second part is the LSC's job. I think that
the initiation of the creation of the LSC has brought to light the ambigious
nature of *what LDraw.org is*, but it is not LSC's job to resolve that. That
is LDraw.org's job with the help of the community at large.
>
> -Tim
Respectully,
Kevin
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
| (...) [snip everything else, good stuff] I think I wasn't clear enough. As you read it, I don't agree either. I meant - this proposal is yet another catalyst to the issue of further organizing and defining LDraw.org. It isn't the LSC's job, but the (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
| (...) Me either. Snipped the next bit because it's a good summation of the roles... (...) And thanks muchly for that! progress on overall org goals had stagnated. a good sharp poke was a good thing. <more snippage> (...) What I think Tim meant here (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
| (...) You're mostly right. I suppose the proposal/message wasn't clear enough (and this is the part I was afraid of it not being clear enough in, so I tried to disclaim it). A couple years ago, the four of us posted this message: (URL) - sometime (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
