Wally, I'd like to see them if you don't mind forwarding them to me. I
have been trying to help them define where the Project logo should be placed
on county web sites. Some people just title a page called "home page" --
and then place the logo there, thus avoiding showing the logo to site
visitors unless they happen to click on the link titled "home page". Not a
big deal, but I feel if we are to be part of something we should follow the
rules (guidelines) in **sprit** as well as the "letter of". Thanks!
Dave Koester
Barrington, Illinois
dwkoester(a)earthlink.net
Coordinator - USGWP Allen and Hancock Cty, Ohio
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wally" <wally(a)calweb.com>
To: <OHGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 2:23 PM
Subject: [OHGW] [DBS] Guidelines Committee weekly report for the week ending
March 23, 2002
Unless something really delusion-shattering comes up, I will not
continue
to
fill your mailbox with forwarded reports of the Guidelines
Committee.
However, if enough of you want to see them, let me know and I will keep
sending. You can also subscribe to the Daily Board Show and get these as
part of that. Just visiting the URL at the end will let you ikeep up with
this committee's decisions.
>Originally From: merope <merope(a)radix.net>
>Subject: [DBS] Guidelines Committee weekly report for
the week ending March 23, 2002
>
>Permission to forward as appropriate is granted.
>
>
>GUIDELINES COMMITTEE WEEKLY REPORT, for the week ending March 23 2002
>
>===
>
>On March 17, the weekly report is submitted to the Project and three
>comments are received from Project members. One of these addresses a
>grammatical error in the working document, which is corrected. One
>concerns the management of state mailing lists and is deferred until the
>Committee is discussing State Coordinator guidelines. The third contains
>several questions, as follows:
>
>1. "The suggested requirement that Local Coordinators provide a link on
>their home page to the main USGenWeb Project page is a new requirement,
>correct? I don't recall hearing anyone make suggestions along this line
>prior to this report, so I am curious as to whether this is something
that
>most Project members want...if compliance with a logo requirement
is not
>currently being attained, how will Local Coordinators react to an
>additional link requirement?"
>
>The Committee discussed this comment for a couple of days. We agree that
>this would constitute a new requirement, but feel that it would not put
an
>undue burden on the LCs, nor would it unduly infringe on a
LC's right to
>determine their page design. Providing a link back to the USGenWeb
Project
>not only makes sense, since the LC's page is part of the
Project, but
would
>be a boon to visiting genealogists. We have thus decided to keep
this in
>as a new requirement.
>
>As part of this discussion, we also discussed logos. Project members are
>required to prominently display an official USGenWeb Project logo, but
>"prominent" is not defined. A Committee member noted that her state
>defines "prominent" as "near the top" and this has worked well in
that
>state. Another Committee member discussed the proliferation of banners,
>ads, and other logos on Project web pages. After some discussion, several
>Committee members noted that in many cases these banners and ads might be
>required by the hosting server, and in any case there is little that can
be
>done about it without getting into very subjective areas of
design and
>creativity. A recommendation that the logo be placed near the top of the
>LC's main page is suggested and agreed to by a majority of Committee
>members. This recommendation is limited to the "home" or "main"
page of
the
>local website.
>
>"2. Probably not important, but I couldn't figure out what the
>contradiction referred to by the following is -- State Mail List: It was
>noted that the current requirement for CCs to join a state mailing list
>contradicts a requirement in the current guidelines for State
Coordinators."
>
>A Committee member provided the answer for this question: "the
>contradiction is in the way the sentence was written. SCs are required to
>maintain a state mail list and have all LCs subscribed. The CC previous
>guidelines indicated that the State might "NOT" have a mail list and if
>that were so they should contact their SC."
>
>The Committee will revise the Guidelines to address this discrepancy.
>
>"3. Regarding disclaimers that USGenWeb is not affiliated with
non-USGenWeb
>message systems, I'm not sure the definition of
"non-USGenWeb" is
entirely
>clear. For example, is a query system maintained by the local
genealogy
>society in the county which I coordinate a "non-USGenWeb" system? Would
I
>need a public disclaimer that USGenWeb is not affiliated with the
local
>gnealogy society? Are Query Express/Surname Helper "non-USGenWeb"
systems?"
>
>There was much discussion on this issue, including a description of Query
>Express and a description of the extent of control LCs may exercise if
they
>manage Ancestry message boards. The Chair of the Committee
pointed out
>that the USGenWeb itself does not have a query system and that even a
>system managed entirely by a LC is technically a "non-USGenWeb
>system." The Chair thus suggests changing the wording of the
>recommendation to read "If you choose to use a query system that is
managed
>by someone other than yourself, such as a commercial company, its
is
>recommended that...etc." The general consensus is to leave the
disclaimer
>in as a recommendation only to LCs and to word it more generally
to refer
>to query systems that are not controlled directly by the LC.
>
>After further discussion, the recommendation to add a disclaimer
regarding
>off-site query systems was temporarily removed from the working
>document. As noted above, most Committee members are in favor of
>recommending to LCs that they include such a disclaimer, but it has been
>suggested that since LCs link to many places and resources that are out
of
>their control, a more generic disclaimer that a LC could add to
their
home
>page might be more suitable. The Committee will explore this
issue
further.
>
>===
>
>The current version of the working document is posted
>at:
http://www.radix.net/~merope/lcguide.txt
>
>Please address comments to Teresa Lindquist <merope(a)radix.net>
>
>-Teresa Lindquist
>Chair, Guidelines Committee
>Representative At Large, USGenWeb Project
>merope(a)radix.net
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
wally(a)calweb.com
==== OHGEN Mailing List ====
OHGenWeb Project
http://www.Scioto.Org/OHGenWeb/index.html