More on renaming WG to Activity Area #1613
Conversation
eduardo-rodrigues
changed the title
|
Hi @eduardo-rodrigues - thanks a lot for doing this. I am generally favourable, but I think in many of the cases "X Activity Area" can just be "X Activity". It's a bit less of a mouthful. e.g., The Detector Simulation Working Group considers approaches to making... -> The Detector Simulation Activity considers approaches to making... What do you think? |
|
Yes, there are places where one could be shorter and omit "Area". I was not sure. In other places "group" is the right word, because it stands for "group of people". |
|
I just added another commit that corrects the SG mandate, which still mentioned WGs a lot |
hegner
left a comment
hegner
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just two minor things and then we are ready to merge.
Further findings can go into a new PR.
These links are no longer valid, so remove them and note that they are not available
graeme-a-stewart
force-pushed
the
eduardo-update-aa-renaming
branch
from
0f62f24 to
282a3e1
Compare
These are calendar URLs, so they don't work when checked as normal web pages
|
OK, I fixed up the last few minor issues - this is good to go. Thanks @eduardo-rodrigues for having done most of the real work! |
Let me know what you think of these follow-up changes that I noticed were missing.
In short I renamed "Working Group" to "Activity Area" and in some text where "working group" is mentioned I simply left "group", as in "group a people", which seems OK. But one could be more aggressive.