This section summarises the working methodology of the CLWG; this methodology is conditioned by both general and specific constraints related with the standardisation-by-consensus approach.
Recall the phases of the work and their output. For convenience, we here summarise these in table 3. The documents cited are from the subgroup on morphosyntax. The syntax group managed to condense its output into one major report, which, in its internal structure, reflects the relevant phases as well.
|Synopsis||Survey of best practice||Survey report (Morphsyn report)|
|Comparative assessment||Survey report (Morphsyn rep.)|
|Inventory||List of labels, first proposals||Survey and proposals report (Morphsyn report)|
|Proposals||Formal specification (Descriptive guidelines)||ELM reports series|
|Proposals for use in lexical classification (Operational guidelines)||ELM reports series|
|Validation||Test: automatic mapping with existing approaches||TSM report|
|Pilot resources: medium scale application experiment; Further testing: tagset development||EAGLES/ELSNET IT and DE corpora (Tags report)|
The phases build one on the other, and they implement a stepwise process (from smaller to larger, from dispersed to concentrated, from consensual to tested, from informal to formally represented and implemented (runnable specifications) proposals). This can be symbolised as in figure 1, below.
Figure 1: Steps towards proposals for standards for lexical description
This working methodology has proven applicable in the fields of morphosyntax and syntactic subcategorisation. It may be tried as well in other tasks addressed with the same objective.