Purpose
This MISMO Process Document outlines the procedures that govern the Creation and Modification of MISMO Engineering Guideline Documents (MEGs).
On the Architecture call on October 5 a new process was adopted for the approval of the MEG files that will compose the Engineering Guidelines. Approval will take votes in two Architecture meetings/calls. This is to allow ample time for the committee to refine the guidelines
High Level Process
Tracking
The document MismoEngineeringGuidelinesNamesAndNumbers.doc will be used for tracking status of individual MEG documents. As new MEGS are proposed, they will be added to this document. As MEGS work their way through the above process, their status and version numbers will also be reflected.
Process Notes
- The Core Structures workgroup is responsible for proposing MEGs, creating, refining, and reviewing them, and approving a recommendation for adoption to the Architecture Committee.
- Individual MEG Documents are approved as the workgroup addressed them. All MEGS in an approved state will be submitted to Architecture when Architecture Calls occur.
- First Reading
- At Architecture meetings, a motion to approve the first reading of the guideline is made. This can be accepted as-is or can with issues/comments raised as discussed in “Managing Comments and Issues” below.
- Second Reading
- At a later Architecture call, the refined document, including issues documentation, will be presented to the Architecture Committee meeting for “Second Reading”. Presumably issues raised in the first reading will have been resolved acceptably by this time (see Managing Comments and Issues).
- A motion to adopt will be made at the second reading and if passed the MEG becomes and adopted guideline.
Comments and Issues raised in Core Structures or Architecture meetings will be captured in the “Known Issues” section of each MEG document. These comments can come from the initial design/construction process, from Core Structures feedback, or from formal Architecture feedback from the First Reading.
- It is expected that all issues and comments are addressed prior to submission to Architecture for the Second Reading.
- During the period between two meeting the committee is encouraged to review and comment on the MEG. All comments received will be recorded in the MEG and the resolution of the issue clarified.
- As issues and comments are incorporated into the MEG, Changes are noted in the Changes since last version section.
- As Issues are resolved to the satisfaction of the Core Structures and Architecture Workgroups, they will be removed from the final version of the document.
Versioning
MEG Files will be versioned to ensure that the workgroups can properly track them. As noted above, version information will be kept in the MISMO Engineering Guidelines Names And Numbers document as well as in each individual MEG.
Drafts prior to First Reading will have version numbers less that 1. For example, three initial drafts might have the version numbers .90, .95, and .99.
Regardless of the draft version numbers used, the first generation of a MEG introduced to Architecture will be labeled 1.0.