W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > September 2018

Re: CNEG subgroup - proposing Use Case (Issue 239) to Plenary

From: Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park) <Nicholas.Car@csiro.au>
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 08:50:24 +0000
To: "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "Peter.Winstanley@gov.scot" <Peter.Winstanley@gov.scot>
CC: Dataset Exchange Working Group <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E0617CC3-FF1A-44FC-BAF1-F123A6A18F85@csiro.au>
With 3 x +1, 1 x 0 and 0 x -1 out of a possible 6 voters (the regular attendees of CNEG meetings), this is carried.

Karen or Peter: please could you indicate in the agenda for the next plenary meeting that this Use Case is supported by the CNEG group who asks Plenary to endorse it?

Thanks,

Nick

Nicholas Car
Senior Experimental Scientist
CSIRO Land & Water
E nicholas.car@csiro.au<mailto:nicholas.car@csiro.au> M 0477 560 177<tel:0477%20560%20177> P 07 3833 5632
Dutton Park, QLD, Australia

On 1 Sep 2018, at 4:43 pm, Rob Atkinson <robatkinson101@gmail.com<mailto:robatkinson101@gmail.com>> wrote:

+1

Fine to add requirement for human readable annotations as well as follow-your-nose links to alternatives.


On Sat, 1 Sep 2018, 10:53 Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park) <Nicholas.Car@csiro.au<mailto:Nicholas.Car@csiro.au>> wrote:
The purpose of bringing this Use Case through is to then generate a requirement, as per the general pattern of UC -> Req -> Req Response.

On 1/9/18, 2:49 am, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:

    A basic requirement for human readable documentation appears in the use
    case but isn't in the list of requirements. If the group agrees, that
    can be added as a requirement. (It generally seems like a good idea,
    right?)

    kc

    On 8/31/18 8:16 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
    > I remain +0 for the protocol negotiation part via URL munging, and an
    > enthusiastic +1 for the requirement for human readable documentation.
    >
    >
    >
    > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 10:26 PM Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park)
    > <Nicholas.Car@csiro.au<mailto:Nicholas.Car@csiro.au>> wrote:
    >
    >     Dear DWGX Conneg Subgroup,
    >
    >     This email may appear twice due to a send issue at my end. Please
    >     take this copy to be the bet one.
    >
    >     We have a left-over action from our last meeting to consider
    >     promoting the Use Case “Web browser navigation of profile
    >     information” (https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/239) to the Plenary
    >     group for voting on.
    >
    >     Please could Conneg subgroup members reply to this with either +1, 0
    >     or -1 to indicate if this Use Case should be sent to Plenary? Votes
    >     should be in before the Plenary on 2018-09-04 in order for it to be
    >     considered there.
    >
    >     Thanks,
    >
    >     Nick
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Rob Sanderson
    > Semantic Architect
    > The Getty Trust
    > Los Angeles, CA 90049

    --
    Karen Coyle
    kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net

    m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
    skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600



Received on Saturday, 1 September 2018 08:51:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:01 UTC