
| Creator: | Makx Dekkers |
|---|---|
| Date Issued: | 2004-12-20 |
| Identifier: | http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/2004/12/20/approval/ |
| Replaces: | http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/2003/08/14/approval/ |
| Is Replaced By: | http://dublincore.org/documents/2007/08/06/approval/ |
| Latest version: | http://dublincore.org/documents/approval/ |
| Status of document | This is a DCMI Process Document |
| Description of document: | This document lists the step-by-step process for the approval of DCMI metadata terms and other recommendations. |
| NOTE | Please note that this document is currently under revision. Changes will be made reflecting the new work structure introduced in late 2006 with DCMI Communities and Task Groups replacing DCMI Working Groups, and including the new process under development for submission and evaluation of Application Profiles. |
| Step | Event | Action | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Open issue or requirement is identified by the community and raised in a Working Group | Working Group (WG) Chair creates an Open Issue Item and adds it to WG Open issue list | Open Issue list change |
| 2 | Discussion on Working Group mailing list leads to proposal(s) for solution and identification of responsible authors/editorial team | WG Chair adds the deliverable to the WG Task List, including authors/editorial team responsible for the document and a target delivery date | WG Task list change |
| 3 | Authors/editorial team finalize draft document | Authors/editorial team (in consultation with WG Chair) post message to WG and link document from WG pages | DCMI Working Draft |
| 4 | WG Discussion | WG Chair manages the discussion and iterative review, and coordinates revision of proposal with the authors/editorial team | DCMI Working Draft (revisions) |
| 5 | Consensus reached in WG | WG Chair summarizes consensus and posts last call to WG | DCMI Working Draft (final) |
| 6 | Resolution of all comments | WG Chair submits to Managing Director | DCMI WG Proposal |
| 7 | DCMI Managing Director receives DCMI WG Proposal | DCMI Managing Director assigns WG Proposal to review team (Usage Board if related to Metadata Term Semantics or (subset of) Advisory Board plus external reviewers otherwise). | Review team established |
| Step | Event | Action | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | Review starts | DCMI Managing Director assigns a shepherd to the proposal | DCMI WG Proposal Review in process |
| 9 | Review team discussion | Proposal shepherd manages the discussion in the review team and coordinates Review comments | Review Team discussion results |
| 10 | Review Results submitted to DCMI Managing Director | DCMI Managing Director and Review Team Chair, in consultation with proposal editor, evaluate Review Team discussion results and decide to either accept (possibly with changes) or reject the proposal |
If accepted, proposal becomes a DCMI Proposed Recommendation If rejected, proposal is referred back to the WG for further discussion |
| 11 | Final text for DCMI Proposed Recommendation available | DCMI Managing Director posts DCMI Proposed Recommendation to DC-General and DCMI Web site for Public Comment | Public Comment period commences |
| 12 | Public Comment period (minumum four weeks) | Proposal shepherd manages Public Comment period | Public Comments from community |
| 13 | Public Comment period finishes | Review team evaluates Proposal and Public Comment results and recommend approval (possibly with changes) or rejection with cause | Recommendation for approval or rejection to DCMI Managing Director |
| 14 | DCMI Directorate receives recommendation | DCMI Managing Director, in consultation with WG Chair, review team and others, decides on outcome of process and makes public announcement |
If accepted, proposal becomes DCMI Recommendation If rejected, special action |
| 15 | Final text for DCMI Recommendation available | DCMI Managing Director posts DCMI Recommendation to DC-General and DCMI Web site | Process completed |
For a more detailed description, see the DCMI Usage Board Administrative Processes document.
| Step | Event | Action | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | Review starts | Usage Board chair assigns a shepherd to the proposal; proposal is posted on DCMI Web site for Public Comment; shepherd announces to DC-General | Public Comment period commences |
| 9 | Public Comment period (minimum four weeks) | Proposal shepherd manages Public Comment period | Public Comments from community |
| 10 | Public Comment period finishes | Proposal shepherd prepares for Usage Board discussion | Summary of Public Comments and proposed resolution for Usage Board |
| 11 | Usage Board meeting or conference call | Usage Board discusses proposal, taking into account Public Comment results, according to established guidelines and criteria and recommend approval or rejection with cause | Usage Board recommends approval or rejection to DCMI Managing Director |
| 12 | DCMI Managing Director receives recommendation | DCMI Managing Director, in consultation with Usage Board Chair and others, decides on outcome of process and makes public announcement |
If accepted, proposed term becomes part of DCMI Metadata Terms If rejected, proposal is referred back to the WG for further discussion |
| 13 | Proposal accepted | Usage Board Chair prepares new version of authoritative documentation; Web team loads new term into http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/ | Process completed |
Copyright © 1995-2013 DCMI. All Rights Reserved.