Hi Ken,
Thank you for your response. To answer your quesiton, your response doesn't really address the issue or help at this stage. I apologise in advance on that. It might warrant further consideration and thought.
I'll rephrase my request so that it is better understood and answers you requests directly:
1. In the 'Research' forum (or similar) I would see great benefit in having a topic called ''Revisions and Errata'. The reason for this is that relevance and credence in a sphere of 'research', and (asperational) 'standards', is only built upon honest and open discussion and display of 'revisions and errata'. With the recent ORM conference, it was suggested that ORM achieve ISO standard qualification. If that is to be the case, then there will be no option but to publish revisions and errata. There was also discussion of 'unification' of Niam and ORM. That will entail change, revisions and in the process there will undoubtably be errata. Basically, if there is nothing to hide, then it's a great idea to publish revisions and errata.
This in response to >> "If the topic you want is not already there, then its best to request a new topic by name."
Colloquially - I just see this a the type of web site where I would hope to find the glossary, the documentation, the (future) standard, the revisions, the errata. If not, I'd kind of question the relevance of an organisation that doesn't challenge itself. That's all.
2. 'Open Letters'. The risk of not having this type of 'topic' somewhere, is that people will just ask their general questions anywhere they can. For instance, Orthogonal software's objectrolemodeling.com has a 'General Discussion' forum where people new to ORM come and ask questions, and even challenge ORM. By allowing the challenge, the site has relevance, because people wouldn't bother writing anything if they weren't interested in a response. And that's not to mention the ability of ORM specialists to help people find the information that they need by answering their questions. I feel that Orthoganal have hit the nail on the head there and I see great benefit for ormfoundation.org to do something similar.
This in response to >> "If the topic you want is not already there, then its best to request a new topic by name."
To be honest, I don't mind what it's called. Let's just have an open section where novices to academics can raise questions.
3. Yes. I agree, where a document exists in the library, and where someone wants to write directly to that document there is the ability to do that, and I have. It's a great feature of the site.
4. Maybe there is a glitch, I can't find the new 'ORM Workshops' section under the Research group.
Best regards
Victor