Discussion List Archives

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Provisional approval for revisions of existing dictionaries

  • To: Multiple recipients of list <comcifs-l@iucr.org>
  • Subject: Re: Provisional approval for revisions of existing dictionaries
  • From: Ted Baker <ted.baker@auckland.ac.nz>
  • Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 09:18:56 +0100 (BST)
Dear David,
            It was good to see you again in Prague. Just a note to say
that I fully support the suggestion you make below.
      Cheers
         Ted Baker

--------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, 4 Sep 1998, I. David Brown wrote:

> 
> 	I was wondering if we should review our procedures now that we
> have the DMGs operating.  It doesn't now seem so necessary that
> revisions to the existing dictionaries should be brought to Comcifs for
> provisional approval.  If the DMGs are well constituted and Comcifs has
> its scouts watching out for problems in the DMG discussions, it should
> only be necessary for Comcifs to be asked for final approval.  If problems
> are detected at this stage, the DMG would be asked to fix them before
> approval is granted.  The advantages of such a change in procedure
> are:
> 	1. Comcifs load will be lightened.  I suspect that most
> dictionaries get a rather cursory read from Comcifs members at the
> provisional approval stage (and maybe also at the final approval stage). 
> 	2. The work of the DMGs would be streamlined so that there is
> little delay in getting new versions of the dictionaries into circulation
> since there would not be a waiting period before final approval.
> 	3. Many of the changes will be rather minor and will not require
> extensive input from the workers in the field.
> 	4. The DMG discussion lists will make it easier for everyone
> interested to follow the discussions and contribute earlier in the
> process.
> 
> The disadvantages are:
> 	1. Communication between a DMG and Comcifs might break down, so
> that matters of principle are not referred back to Comcifs for guidance.
> However, with discussion lists this may be avoided, and Comcifs can always
> return a proposal that does not conform to current policies.
> 
> 	It might be worth considering including all members of DMGs as
> auditors of the Comcifs discussions.  In this case they would become more
> aware of Comcifs procedures and the philosophical issues that come before
> Comcifs and how they are resolved.
> 
> 			Best wishes
> 
> 				David 
>  
> *****************************************************
> Dr.I.David Brown,  Professor Emeritus
> Brockhouse Institute for Materials Research, 
> McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
> Tel: 1-(905)-525-9140 ext 24710
> Fax: 1-(905)-521-2773
> idbrown@mcmaster.ca
> *****************************************************
> 


Reply to: [list | sender only]
International Union of Crystallography

Scientific Union Member of the International Science Council (admitted 1947). Member of CODATA, the ISC Committee on Data. Partner with UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in the International Year of Crystallography 2014.

International Science Council Scientific Freedom Policy

The IUCr observes the basic policy of non-discrimination and affirms the right and freedom of scientists to associate in international scientific activity without regard to such factors as ethnic origin, religion, citizenship, language, political stance, gender, sex or age, in accordance with the Statutes of the International Council for Science.