Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Finally, we expect to see results that we haven't thought of yet, the construction of which will be initiated as the need arises, by (representatives of) those that need such results for a specific purpose. Perhaps we might produce a method for resolving terminological discussions that can be lengthy and do not always get properly resolved (e.g. as in id-core issues #4#122). Here, we leverage a prior collaboration between Daniel Hardman (Evernym) and  Rieks Joosten (TNO).

...

Deliverables

  1. Develop and maintain a high-quality corpus of terminology that covers the needs of the ToIP community.
  2. Develop a process whereby this corpus can be:
    1. Curated, based on evidence and using expert opinion, such that concepts, relations between concepts and constraints can e.g. be
      1. carefully defined,
      2. assigned an identifier (name/number/label) to distinguish it from any other concept in the corpus,
      3. mapped onto terms that are defined and/or commonly accepted in various relevant domains/contexts,
      4. their usage and relevance documented from organic sources,
      5. their status adjudicated into e.g. 'working', 'preferred', 'accepted', 'superseded' and 'deprecated'.
    2. Enhanced in a collaborative, open, and fair manner by interested community members.
    3. Versioned.
    4. Published in different ways (e.g. as a glossary, concept map, use-case stories ...), for specific purposes (e.g. education, reference, , ...) by different means (e.g. a PDF, a website, presentations/webinars, ...) and as needed by different audiences/stakeholders or domains (e.g. business domains, architectural domains, ...)
    5. Promoted as a valuable public resource and an influence for convergence and excellence.
  3. Train and organize volunteers so the initiative develops sustainable long-term momentum.
  4. Disseminate/promote the work across ToIP WGs and other relevant audiences.

...