Talk:Expanded Definition of Milestones

Revision as of 10:34, 31 October 2016 by Juancarlos (talk | contribs) (Changes to Milestones Definition -- Juancarlos (talk) 05:44, 26 October 2016 (CDT))

Changes to Milestones Definition -- Juancarlos (talk) 05:44, 26 October 2016 (CDT)

The suggested expanded definition of an IEEE Milestone seeks to clarify many operational aspects (like language, geographic distribution, . . .) that do not contribute to the core attributes of importance, significance, excellence which have made the program so valued and appreciated all over the world.

Their inclusion in the text dilutes the key condition of historic significance which we, the Committee have to preserve for the Program to keep its value and in honor of the traditional high-standards that have been sought for the previous Milestones, always the most outstanding achievements.

There is a perception by many that somehow the condition of being a truly outstanding achievement may not be met in some present-day proposals. In the proposed definition the issue of the threshold of importance (requested by members of the Committee) is not being properly addressed. The definition of the IEEE Milestone should focus on and deliver the message of enhancing the value of the key attributes and relegate the secondary clarifications into a different piece of text.

I propose to add "the most" in the first phrase of the definition, as follows:

The IEEE Milestones in Electrical Engineering and Computing program honors THE MOST significant technical achievements in all areas associated with IEEE."

As to the listing of fields -which is NOT mentioned as a subject needing clarification, FIRST I think it is not necessary and SECOND I strongly disagree with many of the listed ones. We must preserve the historically coveted value of the IEEE Milestones in Electrical and Computing Engineering, not popularize them by loosening and losing their true character. And which is the intended difference between "areas" and "fields" ?