SCR 3-1131
SCR 3-1131: Fix bad OBJECT_CLASSIFICATION_TYPEs in PSDD
Priority: medium
Problem Summary
In preparing the PDF version of the PSDD, it became clear that a number of objects (and a group) that have been added recently have had a poorly assigned OBJECT_CLASSIFICATION_TYPE. I suggest the following should be re-assigned:
DATA_SET_HOUSEKEEPING
Should be reset from STRUCTURE to DATA SET CATALOG (or SYSTEM)
DATA_SET_RELEASE
Should be reset from STRUCTURE to DATA SET CATALOG (or SYSTEM)
PARAMETERS
Should be reset from STRUCTURE to PRODUCT CATALOG
RESOURCE_INFORMATION
Should be reset from STRUCTURE to DATA SET CATALOG (or SYSTEM)
Working Group
E. Rye (lead) S. Hughes, R. Joyner
Originator: Elizabeth Rye
Standards Change Request
Discussion
- Discussion Blog
- Telecons: 2008-02-27 (HTML)
Supplementary Material
Status
Votes
The Tech Group voted 6-1-2 via telecon and email on 02/27/08 to reject (withdraw) this SCR, directing that it be dealt with as an internal EN matter.
| Node | Representative | Version 1 |
|---|---|---|
| ATM | Lyle Huber | reject |
| EN | Elizabeth Rye | reject |
| GEO | Susie Slavney | reject |
| IMG | Patty Garcia | reject |
| NAIF | absent | – |
| PPIa | Todd King | approve direct to implementati |
| RINGS | absent | – |
| RS | Dick Simpson | reject |
| SBN | Anne Raugh | reject |
a
My vote is to “Approve direct to implementation”. Both of these SCR were clearly written and defined a good solution. It seems strange that a “Reject” vote means approval to implement.
This also seemed precedurally strange. Asking for just enough “votes” to reject, rather than calling for a vote (and counting all of them).