IvoaTCG-2019-08-22 < IVOA

---++++ 
---+ IVOA TCG Telecon - Tue, 16 Jul 2019 @15:00 UTC
---++++ _Last edit -&gt; Aug 22 (JE)_
---++ _Attendees_
   * 
---++ _Regrets_

   * M. Demleitner, T. Dower, G. Lemson, K. Polsterer, A. Schaaf,
---++ <a name="Agenda_Mtg_Notes"></a>Agenda/Mtg Notes
<div title="Page 4">
   * Review Actions (See below)
   * Current RFC/TCG reviews 
      * See: <a target="_top" href="IvoaTCG#On_going_Recommendations">https://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/IvoaTCG#On_going_Recommendations</a>
   * Groningen Update 
      * <span style="background-color: transparent;">Draft Schedule (</span><a target="_top" href="InterOpOct2019">https://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/InterOpOct2019</a><span style="background-color: transparent;">) </span>
      * <span style="background-color: transparent;">Schedule request page (https://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/ProgramPrepGroningen)</span>
      * TCG meeting in Groningen - Wed or Thu??
   * 2019A Roadmaps 
      * [[2019ARoadmap][2019A Roadmap]] - Reference leading to Groningen Meeting
   * TCG topics 
      * Caproles (from M. Demleitner, P. Dowler lead)
      * <span style="background-color: transparent;">Status of document process in github</span>
      1 
         1 <span style="background-color: transparent;">I think the github presence is ready. Apps would like to start using it for our next round of standards updates. Is there a documented process that comes with the repo?</span>
         1 <span style="background-color: transparent;">Is it OK to handle some of the discussions on github itself, say through pull request comments or by filing and commenting on issues, or does all discussion still need to happen on the mail list? I would understand if that&rsquo;s the case, but it may also render less useful some of those built-in github features.</span>
      * <span style="background-color: transparent;">Tighter coupling of reference implementations to standards approval</span> 
         1 <span style="background-color: transparent;">So far, the requirement for reference implementations for standards has been useful, but in the RFC it&rsquo;s mostly a matter of checking that box. </span>
         1 <span style="background-color: transparent;">I&rsquo;m curious how people feel about being more rigorous in accepting those implementations. I&rsquo;m mainly thinking about having them be reviewed and tested to verify both interoperability and coverage for </span> *all* <strong> <span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></strong> the requirements of the standard.

   * AOB
</div>
---++ <a name="Actions"></a>Actions
<div title="Page 4">
   * *OPEN/WORKING* 
      * ACTION-T0219-5: PD/JE - kick off the Architecture doc effort and distribute tasks to team - *WORKING*
      * ACTION-F0518-4: Laurant - Produce documentation on how the models relate and how to get started with certain use cases.<strong> WORKING</strong>
      * ACTION-T2019 -6: PD/JE: Ask DOC to transfer links to new Publishing on the VO doc when time is right *- OPEN*
</div>
This topic: IVOA > WebHome > IvoaTCG > IvoaTCG-2019-08-22
Topic revision: r2 - 2019-08-22 - JanetEvans