[sc34wg3] Draft Minutes from Baltimore: 6-9 December 2003

[Patrick Durusau]

Jim,

Mason, James David (MXM) wrote:

>I think the "institutional memory" function is very important. There are a
>lot of things in SGML that people wonder about now (and are trying to
>reinvent in XML) without having the context which gave rise to them (e.g.,
>Mason misinterpreted something and put it into a viewgraph; Goldfarb
>transmogrified Mason's mistake and put it into the standard [datatag]). All
>too often the predecessor of WG1 found itself backtracking because it didn't
>have a record of discussions (not that some of our discussions would be
>publishable on any public server).
>
>How about changing the title from "minutes" to "notes"?
>
Sure, notes is the more accurate term (no connotation of being an 
"official" record).

Kudos to Jim for the first entered correction!

Patrick

>
>Jim
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:pdurusau@emory.edu]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 3:14 PM
>To: sc34wg3@isotopicmaps.org
>Subject: Re: [sc34wg3] Draft Minutes from Baltimore: 6-9 December 2003
>
>
>Jim,
>
>Mason, James David (MXM) wrote:
>
>>I think we need to post them as a numbered document, but with a caveat that
>>they are an individual contribution and not an official meeting report
>>
>(i.e,
>
>>Patrick is the author, and the status is "individual contribution"). The
>>recommendations of the meeting are the official record of decisions taken.
>>
>I agree and would note that the "decisions" recorded in the minutes are 
>denoted as "proposed resolution"s. Decisions can be made only by 
>established ISO procedures and as Jim notes, those are reflected in the 
>recommendations of the meeting.
>
>I see the "minutes" (perhaps we need a better, i.e., less official 
>sounding name for them) as having three roles:
>
>1. By daily posting, even an unofficial report of the meetings gives 
>those unable to attend some sense of the work of the group;
>
>2. It serves to encourage the group since it can see the issues it has 
>covered, giving a sense of progress and accomplishment;
>
>3. It serves as a sort of institutional memory, even if it has no 
>normative, informative or other standing in future discussions. WG3 
>could easily decide to take a course different from that discussed at 
>any particular meeting. If my notes serve merely to assist in recalling 
>all the issues that are relevant to a particular decision, then they 
>will have been worth the effort to take and prepare for posting.
>
>Since I am not a professional stenographer (and am not looking for a 
>second/third/forth career) I think Steve Pepper's point that my notes 
>are not completely accurate is well taken. I think they fall somewhere 
>between the notes of someone who did not attend the meeting and  a word 
>by word transcription of everything spoken at the meeting. ;-)
>
>Patrick
>

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
pdurusau@emory.edu