Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-23554

Add document obsolescence facility to lsst-texmf

    Details

    • Type: Story
    • Status: Done
    • Resolution: Done
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: lsst-texmf
    • Labels:
      None
    • Story Points:
      0.5
    • Team:
      Architecture
    • Urgent?:
      No

      Description

      RFC-660 requires that LDM-472 be deprecated. Add an "obsolete" flag to the lsstdoc latex class to add deprecation warnings on each page. This allows us to declare a document to be obsolete whilst also leaving the text available.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment -

            Simplest possible implementation where I say "DEPRECATED" wherever I said "DRAFT" and added a "deprecated" class option.

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - Simplest possible implementation where I say "DEPRECATED" wherever I said "DRAFT" and added a "deprecated" class option.
            Hide
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - - edited

            I have one substantive comment, and a couple of nits to pick.

            Substantive comment: can we avoid the term “deprecated” here? It's too vague in what it means. For example, per Wikipedia, it means “to express disapproval of (something)”; or, in technical usage “to state that a feature is deprecated is merely a recommendation against using it”. I don't think that's appropriate here. We want to say “this document is obsolete, no longer part of the baseline, and carries no authority; it is preserved for historical information only”. So given that, I'd say “obsolete” instead of “deprecated”. (I might also change the text in the “...approved as a Change-Controlled Document...” paragraph to include that “obsolete, non-baselined, historical interest only” disclaimer.)

            Nits:

            • The tail on the final “d” in “Deprecated” falls off the page.
            • On the first page, can you get “Deprecated” to land in front of the image of the telescope? Otherwise, you get weird visual noise in the background. (Alternatively, don't print “deprecated” on the first page at all).
            Show
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - - edited I have one substantive comment, and a couple of nits to pick. Substantive comment: can we avoid the term “deprecated” here? It's too vague in what it means. For example, per Wikipedia, it means “to express disapproval of (something)”; or, in technical usage “to state that a feature is deprecated is merely a recommendation against using it”. I don't think that's appropriate here. We want to say “this document is obsolete, no longer part of the baseline, and carries no authority; it is preserved for historical information only”. So given that, I'd say “obsolete” instead of “deprecated”. (I might also change the text in the “...approved as a Change-Controlled Document...” paragraph to include that “obsolete, non-baselined, historical interest only” disclaimer.) Nits: The tail on the final “d” in “Deprecated” falls off the page. On the first page, can you get “Deprecated” to land in front of the image of the telescope? Otherwise, you get weird visual noise in the background. (Alternatively, don't print “deprecated” on the first page at all).
            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment -

            Reading LPM-51, suggests that the preferred term is "obsolete" rather than "deprecated".

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - Reading LPM-51, suggests that the preferred term is "obsolete" rather than "deprecated".
            Hide
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment -

            Great minds!

            ...and fools.

            Show
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - Great minds! ...and fools.
            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment -

            Changed to obsolete and the suggested text added.

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - Changed to obsolete and the suggested text added.

              People

              • Assignee:
                tjenness Tim Jenness
                Reporter:
                tjenness Tim Jenness
                Reviewers:
                John Swinbank
                Watchers:
                John Swinbank, Tim Jenness, Wil O'Mullane
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                3 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved: