[Css-csts] FW: Late "pseudo RID" on CSTS Guidelines - Contents of Section 1 - Full message

[John Pietras]

Dear all,
Wolfgang requested that I forward his response to my "pseudo-RID" to the CSTS WG mailing list, as the CCSDS Mailman system does not accept messages from him.

Best regards,
John

From: Wolfgang Hell [mailto:wo_._he at t-online.de]
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 10:37 AM
To: John Pietras <john.pietras at gst.com>; CCSDS_CSTSWG (css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org) <css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: Re: Late "pseudo RID" on CSTS Guidelines - Contents of Section 1 - Full message

Dear John,

Given that the Publications Manual in 3.4.1.2 requires the presence of a "Purpose" or "Purpose and Scope" subsection, I concur with the recommended action 1. One could of course argue if the Guidelines need to replay requirements specified in the Publications Manual. I'm in favor of doing so regardless because otherwise the Guidelines wouldn't be self-contained.

The "Cross Support Transfer Services Documentation" subsection had been discussed thoroughly in the Working Group and the key aspect was to provide some guidance in particular to those readers being already familiar with the SLE suite of service specifications. One option might be not to repeat this material in each and every CSTS specification but rather cross reference this material in the SFW. However, given that at the time the Working Group had decided that this subsection should be part of each CSTS document, we should change this only if the Working Group agrees to do so.

The Publications Manual suggests a "Definitions" subsection which consists of the subsections "Terms", "Nomenclature", and "Conventions". Although apparently none of the CSTS specifications follows the Publications Manual, I don't see a compelling reason not to do so. I therefore suggest that we change the Guidelines as well as the CSTS specifications (in other words, we won't touch MD-CSTS at this time) still in our hands accordingly.

Given that in all likelihood sending of this message to the Working Group via the CCSDS mailman will fail again, I would appreciate, if you could pass it on.

Thank you and best regards,
Wolfgang

Am 13.02.2018 um 15:45 schrieb John Pietras:

Dear all,
My apologies for not submitting this as a true RID during the official review period. It has to do with differences between what the Guidelines require for the "Introduction" section (section 1) and what we've been putting in the MD, TD, and (so far) Forward Frame (FF) books.

Recommended Actions:

1.       In section 4.3, add the requirement for a "Purpose of this Recommended Standard" subsection as the first subsection.

2.       Determine if all CSTS books should have a "Cross Support Transfer Services Documentation" subsection, and if so, add it to the Guidelines in section 4.3.

3.       Add requirements for a Nomenclature subsection in 4.3, and clarify the document-organization relationships among "Definitions", "Terms", "Nomenclature", and "Conventions" subsections.

Analysis

1.       The MD, TD, and FF books all have a "Purpose of this Recommended Standard" as the first subsection in the Introduction section. It is not mentioned in the Guidelines.

2.       The MD, TD, and FF books all have a "Cross Support Transfer Services Documentation" subsection that is not mentioned in the Guidelines.  As currently written, this section is two pages of "boilerplate" that is copied without any tailoring. I think that it is useful to continue to include something like this subsection to provide context, but it also occurs to me that as currently written it will cause the reader to ask "Why are you telling me all this? What has this got to do with the CSTS that is the subject of this particular Recommended Standard?" The waiting-for-prototyping-completion TD red book and the in-progress FF book could adopt whatever changes might be made, and the MD blue book could fold in the changes on the next update.

3.       The published MD book has Definitions (1.7), Nomenclature (1.8), and Conventions (1.9) subsections. In contrast, the TD Red Book has a Definitions, Nomenclature, and Conventions subsection (1.6), under which are three subsections: Terms (1.6.1), Nomenclature (1.6.2), and Conventions (1.6.3).

The Guidelines book calls for a Definitions subsection, under which a single Terms subsection is called out. The Guidelines also calls for a separate Conventions subsection, but it is not clear whether it is to be a subsection of the Introduction section (i.e.,  1.x) or a subsection of the Definitions subsection (i.e., 1.<Definitions>.x) following the Terms subsection. Finally, the Guidelines makes no mention of a Conventions subsection.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/css-csts/attachments/20180219/29ceabc8/attachment.html>