Editorial guidelines for Gregobase ?

[Matthias Bry]

Hello everyone,

This email is adressed to Gregobase users (by which I mean contributors _and_ non-contributing users), for which unfortunately (or fortunately?) no mailing list exists. Some questions for you.

1. Should we have editorial guidelines ?

I think so. Contributors come and go in relative anarchy, an anarchy that is moderated by the excellent spirit and competence of our contributors, but an anarchy nonetheless. The database is growing steadily and in recent months I more often than not have been unable to review all new entries.

This question obviously should be answered by Olivier, since he would be the one to promote them on the site (or not).

2. If yes to (1), I have drafted some guidelines. What do you think of them ?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CEJhQTLqp_D1rfp5TQbs-3GLbZ_30vN__IOsxHcrJxU

Commentary mode is enabled, you are very welcome to add comments in this document. There are a _lot_ of arbitrary choices there, that match my own needs as a cantor who edits a lot of booklets from Gregobase entries, but might not be the right choice for the majority of users.

3. If yes to (A), how strictly should the guidelines be enforced?

The only reasonable answer, in my opinion, is: not at all. As of now, the pace of contributions does not justify putting an enforcement system in place. Moreover, it is essential that new contributors should not feel overwhelmed by a massive set of rules. I am not a great PR guy and input on how to make guidelines known to newcomers without scaring them off would be very appreciated.

In Christo,

Matthias Bry

[Rob Leduc]

Really great work!  I think these guidelines are immensely helpful.  I have put a few minor comments in the google doc itself.  Thank you for this!

Rob