Capability map update - spec v0.2 candidate

[edwardchalstrey1]

✅ Checklist

• This pull request has a meaningful title.
• If your changes are not yet ready to merge, you have marked this pull request as a draft pull request.

☑️ Maintainers' checklist

• This pull request has had the appropriate labels assigned
• This pull request has been added to the SATRE backlog project board
• This pull request has been assigned to one or more maintainers

⤴️ Summary

• Changes the capability map to a draw.io for easy editing
• Adds sections of capability map to pillars pages
• Adds "Internal Audit" and "Reporting" headers from @machintim WP3 spreadsheet
• Adds various capabilities to the text that were missing, based off the capability map; Note: these haven't been filled in

TODO:

• Match the capability map to the actual headers in the text

🌂 Related issues

🙋 Acknowledging contributors

• All contributors to this pull request are already named in the table of contributors in the README file.
• The following people should be added to the table of contributors in the README file:

[edwardchalstrey1]

How were the colours chosen? Are they colour-bind safe?

I don't think they look very attractive, and they stand out from the theme.

To add to @manics's point, I'm not very keen on the idea that changing the spec also requires editing, at least, two images.

I could use a blue/black/white theme similar to the readthedocs

Perhaps for now then I'll just have the full capability map on each pillars page, then someone can use Mermaid in a subsequent PR if they want

[JimMadge]

Is there a mermaid figure type that would work?
Could hack something like this but it doesn't look great.

graph TD;
  subgraph 1. Information Governance
     subgraph Project Management
         a(Project Onboarding)
         b(Project Closure)
         c(Roles and Responsibilities)
     end
     subgraph Risk Management
     end
  end

Loading

Would dot/graphviz do what we want?

[edwardchalstrey1]

worth noting that sticking to draw.io means we can easily modify graphics made by @machintim

[edwardchalstrey1]

based on Tim's comments on Teams, I think we should merge this now and make subsequent PRs for specific capability definition updates/deletions/additions

[jemrobinson]

based on Tim's comments on Teams, I think we should merge this now and make subsequent PRs for specific capability definition updates/deletions/additions

Let's discuss in this afternoon's meeting

[edwardchalstrey1]

Based on the WP1 discussion today I will likely:

1. Remove blank headers (including all of Supporting capabilities) from this PR
2. Make some separate PRs for each capability with Tim's one sentence summaries (maybe just one for Supporting capabilities)
3. @harisood can flesh out some of the supporting capabilities

[edwardchalstrey1]

This PR should now be ready to merge

[harisood]

worth noting that sticking to draw.io means we can easily modify graphics made by @machintim

Agreed that draw.io is the easiest barrier to access for collaborative diagrams for anyone looking to make an update, can also be v flexbile on colours, shapes etc

[manics]

If you run pre-commit run -a this should be fine to merge

[jemrobinson]

I'm not sure this is quite right. We had some capabilities under the "supporting" pillar before, but there just wasn't much there. I don't think removing the pillar completely is correct.

If you'd like, I can add a couple of bullet points to them?

[edwardchalstrey1]

I'm not sure this is quite right. We had some capabilities under the "supporting" pillar before, but there just wasn't much there. I don't think removing the pillar completely is correct.

If you'd like, I can add a couple of bullet points to them?

@jemrobinson I'm planning to make a PR that adds the supporting pillar back, where each capabilities tables can also be filled in - would it make sense for you to add your thoughts there? None of the capabilities in supporting had the table properly filled out yet

[edwardchalstrey1]

I'm not sure this is quite right. We had some capabilities under the "supporting" pillar before, but there just wasn't much there. I don't think removing the pillar completely is correct.
If you'd like, I can add a couple of bullet points to them?

@jemrobinson I'm planning to make a PR that adds the supporting pillar back, where each capabilities tables can also be filled in - would it make sense for you to add your thoughts there? None of the capabilities in supporting had the table properly filled out yet

See #117