[DATAGOV Core] Reworked methods/cases throughout the text (in yellow)

[Stefania Milan]

Now, I left in some parts that are highly interesting but not necessarily mobilised for this paper.
I see little empirics mobilise directly (quoted policy documents, for example), hence the part on research assemblages and the role of methods is somewhat out of place.
Also: there seems to be quite some emphasis on standards, but not standard analysis…?

These are just some of the weaknesses. The paper is immature, but has all the necessary elements to fly if we work more on it. To be discussed tomorrow.
Note that I didn’t touch the empirical parts(except breaking down some acronyms and minimal things of this kind), not the discussion, because we are really short on time.
But let me say once again this is a great start!

~st.
Ps and thanks for adding me as a co-author, that’s sweet ;-) I hope you didn’t feel pressured

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ghserv.net/pipermail/core/attachments/20260202/07f2b445/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: revSMBIS_CPDP Fifith draft(1-2-26)[17].docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 153037 bytes
Desc: revSMBIS_CPDP Fifith draft(1-2-26)[17].docx
URL: <http://lists.ghserv.net/pipermail/core/attachments/20260202/07f2b445/attachment-0001.docx>