Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

P&P Review for conformance on use of Partners vs ESIPs #10

Open
honu-girl opened this issue Jan 12, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

P&P Review for conformance on use of Partners vs ESIPs #10

honu-girl opened this issue Jan 12, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@honu-girl
Copy link
Contributor

There is inconsistency with the use of "Partners" versus "ESIPs" throughout the P&P. For clarity, this should be reviewed and updated.

@aebudden aebudden self-assigned this Apr 2, 2024
@aebudden
Copy link
Contributor

aebudden commented Apr 2, 2024

ESIPs should be replaced by partners.
Also, check for instances of 'Federation'. ESIP is Foundation for Earth Science Information Partners (inc). Inc not needed in P&P.

For those working on this issue, please comment which P&P section has been reviewed / completed.

@aebudden
Copy link
Contributor

In cleaning up the language of 'ESIPs' throughout the Policies and procedures, @BenGalewsky noted the occurrence of old language in deprecated documents. We discussed this in the Governance Committee meeting and felt that they could remain as is - they reflect the language in use at the time and are in deprecated status. @honu-girl - as the individual that opened the ticket, I wanted to make you are aware of this decision. I will merge the PR and close this issue, but if you feel that the deprecated documents needs review, please comment.

@aebudden
Copy link
Contributor

Deprecated documents has been addressed. Need to double check for 'Federation'.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants