P&P: RE: Issues Log

["Chris Angus" <chris.angus@btinternet.com>]

> JimS: I'm all for an active issues log, and if a starter document had
> trouble managing its quanity of open issues, I would (as Chair) suggest
> they start using a log, in whatever form they desired.  I don't think we
> should require it.  I don't think we could enforce it.  If it's just
> guidance, I don't think we need a written policy to offer such guidance.

CJA: I am not clear what alternatives you see to some form of issue log if
we are to reach any form of concensus on any of the projects.

> JimS: I also don't think a log would help our current starter documents,
> much anyway.  With a log, you may get some members addressing open
> issues, but what I believe we lack is users actually attempting to use
> the documents for real world purposes.  That IMHO is the only way you
> surface problems that really matter, and find members willing to spend
> the time and effort to resolve the issues.

CJA: I would agree that users attempting to use the documents for real world
purposes is one of the best ways of surfacing issues - that isn't an
argument against having an issue log nor does having an issue log mediate
against it.  It is also important to surface issues that someone sees as
acting against them trying to use the document (or, rather, what is
documented) for some real world purpose.

> JimS: OK, so if a log is a good idea (which I agree), I suggest we see if
> SUMO, Cyc, IFF, and your 4-D Ontology can use such a tool to make
> progress.

Regards
Chris Angus