Profile guidance definitions

[agreiner]

The definitions in the profile guidance need some work.
def of profile
"a particular function", together with the intro text's discussion of "any individual system", is too focused on a single application. If it were only to be used by a single system, there would be no need for profiles as any kind of shared spec.

def of specification
"an act of" is not the def we want. we use it to discuss a thing, not an act.

def of standard
again, wrong definition. What we are talking about is a published specification generally accepted as authoritative.

[agreiner]

Also, the Related Definitions seems like it should be in references. The definition of profiles there is too easily mistaken for our own definition. I like the phrase "a particular application, function, community, or context." I think that is actually what we are talking about.

[aisaac]

Thanks for the comments @agreiner . I'm not going to make a mention to this issue in the document though, because I think it's already captured in #371 which is already mentioned there.
This said I'll put a link to this issue in #371, making sure that that issue won't be closed before this one is closed.

[nicholascar]

This issue was created before the main doc structure change and, as mentioned above, is covered by Issue #371. I propose closing this one to just reduce the total number of open issues as that would be better than just not including it in the doc as it's eacier to include all open Issues tagged appropriately in the doc as this is then an additional logic rule (don't include specific Issue x) that isn't obviously apparent.

Closing could use a comment (from @aisaac or @agreiner) that indeed this is a duplicate of, or is subsumbed by, Issue #371.

[aisaac]

I sense we should keep this one open. I like closing issues, but I'm afraid if we put @agreiner's opening comment here as a comment in #371 it will be soon overflowed by discussions on the structure (which #371 is rather about for the moment)

[heidivanparys]

def of specification
"an act of" is not the def we want. we use it to discuss a thing, not an act.

It seems that the wrong definition from Oxford English Dictionary was chosen. The one referred to in the guidance refers to the process of specifying, the one actually meant is the one that should refer the the outcome of specifying.

Oxford English Dictionary also has a definition for the outcome, a detailed description of the design and materials used to make something.

However, it is probably too narrow for this profile guidance. Then the first definition from Oxford Learner's Dictionary of Academic English (which is the same as the definition at Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary) is probably more suited: a detailed description of how something is, or should be, designed or made.

So could a solution for "specification" be replacing the definition with detailed description of how something is, or should be, designed or made?