gotcha. well, there are many volunteers including myself that have sometimes advocated for creating official documentation using better techniques. Marcin adopted the wiki and google docs way of doing things to lower the barrier of entry(edited)
10:18 PM
i think i may even have the conversation documented in my log checks
10:18 PM
anyways I'd definitely recommend familiarizing yourself with the Documentation Team info on the wiki
I’m not saying that wiki and google docs are bad or whether you should stop using them. What I am saying is there might be a way to standardize them for the finished product.
I work in a very niche tech writing field where we already do all that for aerospace. Because if anything is off, even just a little bit, things go “boom”
10:22 PM
However, the license to use S1000D is too limiting for what we need
Yeah that's pretty awesome. I haven't worked in high tech yet but I was applying to a job that I probably won't get due to lack of experience in high tech, but you miss all the shots you don't take, right(edited)
so yeah, like i said, he even says here, we should do it, just note the scope and limitations and priorities
at the time we were advising continuous documentation with sphinx(edited)
Well Michael Altfield was the guy who was making the original suggestion and he uses a read the docs sphinx thing for his docs and we were wanting to take that approach... ill grab u the repo in a sec(edited)
Fork-ready base for your project's documentation using Sphinx + Read the Docs on GitHub Pages - GitHub - maltfield/rtd-github-pages: Fork-ready base for your project's documentatio...
again, this is just one way and I definitely look forward to hearing more of what you have in mind. and also, i note that his workflows did have some build errors when I tried to contribute some docs to docs.buskill.in(edited)
goldfishlaser#1337
again, this is just one way and I definitely look forward to hearing more of what you have in mind. and also, i note that his workflows did have some build errors when I tried to contribute some docs to docs.buskill.in (edited)
So I am not familiar with ReST (but it looks awesome.) I’ll have to set my environment up for the 50 machines (assuming it’s not somewhere else already)
12:13 AM
I’m all for doing a Red Hat-like freemium service, or having OSE franchises
Summer
So I am not familiar with ReST (but it looks awesome.) I’ll have to set my environment up for the 50 machines (assuming it’s not somewhere else already)
So, I did a little research and found out that the S1000D and other S Series aerospace specifications are based on ISO Standard ISO 10303-239 Product Life Cycle Support (PLCS.) I’m going to buy a copy so I can use it for work and for here. http://www.ap239.org/ for more information
6:47 PM
The idea is that we can use it to create our OSE specifications that can be used throughout the entire life cycle of the GVCS. Benefits include:
*Complete standardization of the machines
*Ability to build software, including digital twins, and online documentation, of the machines
*Ability to open source said standards
*The ability to collaborate because everyone is on the same page
*Other things I haven’t thought of yet (might edit this one later)
I did the tech writing and IT for a major defense contractor for about six years. They’re going through a lot of changes so I quit and I’m doing similar things on my own through independent contract work.
6:58 PM
Im glad I left, based on current events. Nearly their entire business plan is based on the US being a member of NATO
heh yeah no worries i think its very clear this administration is very hostile to everything we value here so its kind of not so politically divisive to have problems with it...(edited)
I found a documentation manual that was created with Sphinx and uses the Read the Docs theme, so it’s similar to what @goldfishlaser#1337 recommended we do.
I think it would make more sense to collaborate with folks in aerospace that would publish a standard to OASIS, bc OSHWA is not so much focused on open standards, but resources for OSHW and certifying projects - https://www.oasis-open.org/(edited)
OASIS Open is where individuals, organizations, and governments come together to solve some of the world’s biggest technical challenges through the development of open code and open standards.
goldfishlaser#1337
I think it would make more sense to collaborate with folks in aerospace that would publish a standard to OASIS, bc OSHWA is not so much focused on open standards, but resources for OSHW and certifying projects - https://www.oasis-open.org/(edited)
YAML is not recognized by OASIS as an open standard. XML is, and that’s why S1000D uses XML. S1000D is not an open standard but is based on open standards. If OSHWA wants an open standard based on OASIS, it can’t use YAML. If OSHWA wants YAML to do it, it will have to come up with something on its own. I don’t make the rules ♀️
OASIS DITA is an open standard for XML, used for documents, and XML is appropriate for documents whereas for data it has its weaknesses, hence YAML, which is specifically named "YAML aint markup language" due to not solving for the same thing.(edited)
goldfishlaser#1337
neither xml nor yaml are standards. oasis is a standards consortium. (edited)
This version of the OASIS Open Project (OP) Rules was approved by the OASIS Board of Directors on 14 June 2022 and became effective immediately. The change was announced to OASIS members on 01 July 2022 in https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/members/202207/msg00000.html Table of Contents 1. Purpose of Open Projects 2. Project Formation 3. Role...
10:55 PM
same goes for having a project certified via oshwa, does not require membership.(edited)
10:57 PM
if you're trying to list an open standards project -OASIS. if you're trying list an open hardware project -OSHWA.The sites have all the info you need for submitting your projects.
OSHWA is not a standards committee. Their aim is to foster community around OSHW projects. You could try submit a proposal for a talk on open standards at the Open Hardware Summit, but I doubt you'll get very far.
1
303adastra
OSHWA is not a standards committee. Their aim is to foster community around OSHW projects. You could try submit a proposal for a talk on open standards at the Open Hardware Summit, but I doubt you'll get very far.
By Jérémy Bonvoisin, University of Bath, cross-posted from the Journal of Open Hardware Medium account. In the past 18 months I had the pleasure to be part of a great adventure: establishing a new standard refining the contours of what we mean with “Open Source Hardware”. This standard, DIN SPEC 3105, sets a new milestone
aka "write once, post everywhere" or "create once, publish everywhere" or "single sourcing" is a useful strategy and one we often champion, although I must disagree about it being the first rule or that it means the same thing as don't reinvent the wheel. I know you may have been intending it more colloquially, but for readers' sake. There are also exceptions: https://www.writethedocs.org/videos/portland/2022/don-t-shoot-yourself-in-the-foot-with-content-reuse-anna-gasparyan/(edited)
if i picked a first rule it would be "know your audience" and the second rule to write with the 5Cs "clear, complete, correct, concise, consistent". everything else in technical writing are the details on accomplishing those 2 things(edited)
Since it's probably lost in the chat history (or DM's), it's probably worth reiterating here... the DOF development team is aware of STEP (a.k.a., ISO 10303-239 or AP-239), but there currently aren't any development plans to support STEP any time soon. That being said, we would potentially be interested in your experience with STEP in terms of data that is essential in exchanging product lifecycle designs that we may want to incorporate into DOF.
1
Summer
So ap239 is for medical devices and ap242 is for aerospace
PLCS is AP number 239 and is therefore sometimes referred to as AP239 or as "ISO 10303-239". "information model of ISO 10303-239 PLCS is capable of representing all the information required to cover the entire life cycle of a product. It is not however, aimed at any particular business or industry domain. Because it is designed to be used in many different business applications, it is a large, generic information model."(edited)
1
goldfishlaser#1337
PLCS is AP number 239 and is therefore sometimes referred to as AP239 or as "ISO 10303-239". "information model of ISO 10303-239 PLCS is capable of representing all the information required to cover the entire life cycle of a product. It is not however, aimed at any particular business or industry domain. Because it is designed to be used in many different business applications, it is a large, generic information model." (edited)
Good, because I paid $300 for it and I don’t want to spend that much money on another specification if I don’t have to
303adastra
Since it's probably lost in the chat history (or DM's), it's probably worth reiterating here... the DOF development team is aware of STEP (a.k.a., ISO 10303-239 or AP-239), but there currently aren't any development plans to support STEP any time soon. That being said, we would potentially be interested in your experience with STEP in terms of data that is essential in exchanging product lifecycle designs that we may want to incorporate into DOF.
First, STEP files are compatible with CAD tools and software, which makes them easy to share and edit. FreeCAD and KiCAD already support this file format.
STEP files are also precise, using a mathematical representation of curves known as NURBS to store data accurately. In addition, they can also read and save complete 3D models.
Finally, you can customize a STEP file. It’s easy to share with others to edit or save to another computer as a backup option.
We've discussed tentative plans to support some kind of FreeCAD and KiCAD bindings for DOF at some point, so will definitely keep STEP in mind when that time comes
1
1
1
1
♀️
2
1
1
