head	1.4;
access;
symbols;
locks; strict;
comment	@# @;
expand	@o@;


1.4
date	2005.12.08.09.01.13;	author LeeBelbin;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.3;

1.3
date	2005.12.07.21.34.54;	author LeeBelbin;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.2;

1.2
date	2005.12.07.12.49.48;	author RicardoPereira;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.1;

1.1
date	2005.12.07.11.21.51;	author RogerHyam;	state Exp;
branches;
next	;


desc
@none
@


1.4
log
@none
@
text
@%META:TOPICINFO{author="LeeBelbin" date="1134032473" format="1.1" version="1.4"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="InternalMeetings"}%
---+Skype Meeting for 2005-12-08 9am UTC

---++ Report Review Process
   * What process would we like to see followed?
   * How do we handle the feedback? Do we write updated reports or do the TDWG Executive add addenda, take actions, make recommendations?

---++ GUID Related

---+++ Overlapping of GUID2 and TAG1?
How do we manage to get the GUIDs deliverables done as a firm base for architecture work and not let TAG discussions get in the way of GUID decision making. Suggestion - Roger - you have to write a charter for the TAG!

---+++ GUID + RDF + GML
   * Are GML and RDF complementary or competitors?
   * How to introduce RDF/SW approach to data modeling in GUID?
   * How to make transition from existing knowledge in XML Schema?
   * Inventory of deployed resources (DiGIR + ABCD, TCS, SDD) and relationship to RDF approach

---+++ GUID Meeting Arrangements
   * Discuss Agenda (including Donald's suggestions). 
   * Current head count. Should we invite 4 more people or should we keep numbers low? Financial considerations.
   * Break-out groups are going to be necessary for this size groups - who chairs them and what problems do they address?
   * What roles should Donald, Ricardo an Roger play?
   * What outcomes do we NEED?

-- Main.RicardoPereira - 07 Dec 2005


---++ Documentation of current standards
Should we offer to pay SDD, ABCD and TCS teams to produce documentation in correct format?
   * Yes, as long as we have templates for them to follow.
   * If we pay, they are contracts (or meetings but I don't think this task can be done at a meeting?) so do we know WHO would achieve requirements?

---++ 'Old' Standards 
   * Process group responsibility? Probably not.
   * Are they being used?
   * Lower priority (establish the process we need and get all on track, then go back a tidy up as funds/time allows)

-- Main.RogerHyam - 07 Dec 2005@


1.3
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="LeeBelbin" date="1133991294" format="1.1" version="1.3"}%
d12 1
a12 1
How do we manage to get the GUIDs deliverables done as a firm base for architecture work and not let TAG discussions get in the way of GUID decision making. Suggstion - Roger - you have to write a charter for the TAG!
d40 1
a40 1
-- Main.RogerHyam - 07 Dec 2005
@


1.2
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="RicardoPereira" date="1133959788" format="1.1" version="1.2"}%
d5 4
d12 1
a12 1
How do we manage to get the GUIDs deliverables done as a firm base for architecture work and not let TAG discussions get in the way of GUID decision making.
d23 3
d32 2
d36 3
a38 3
Process group responsibility?


@


1.1
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="RogerHyam" date="1133954511" format="1.1" version="1.1"}%
d3 1
d5 1
a5 1
---+Skype Meeting for 2005-12-08 9am UTC
d7 1
a7 1
---++ Overlapping of GUID2 and TAG1?
d10 13
d31 1
a31 1
-- Main.RogerHyam - 07 Dec 2005@