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

Re: [dxwg] Pull Request: Profile guidance doc

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2018 08:16:27 -0700
To: "Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park)" <Nicholas.Car@csiro.au>
Cc: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9c366b92-c382-a77a-9f63-c97568778db2@kcoyle.net>
I'll get to this in the next 24 hours. I also wanted to remove the old
requirements as a way to reduce the bulk of the github issues and
perhaps avoid confusion. I know there was concern that we would lose
discussion, and I don't know what to do about that. The closed issues
are still available but are "hidden" in the closed issue list.

Does anyone see a need to keep these as open? If so, perhaps we can
create a special label for them.

kc

On 9/1/18 2:41 PM, Car, Nicholas (L&W, Dutton Park) wrote:
> Hi Karen,
> 
> Yes, just a result of the GitHub labels’ incompleteness. I suppose that
> those marked plenary-complete at the time of Google Doc —> GitHub are
> the only ones marked with that label now if they haven’t been updated.
> Having that label should, I think, can be the criteria to be add to the
> doc - nice and traceable.
> 
> Looks like there are 14 in those two places. If you mark the shortfall
> in the GitHub Issues, I’ll add to the doc. 
> 
> Perhaps we could start removing labelling artefacts from the Issue
> titles to tidy them up in both GitHub and the doc? I removed the
> redundant “Requirement: “ (they are all tagged “requirement”) already
> due to a request from the CNEG meeting so now perhaps we can remove the
> other identifiers like [ID46] (5.46) too? We can put those IDs in the
> Issue body. Should I go and do that? Also “Use Case: “ which is used
> inconsistently and all actual Use Cases are tagged as such too.
> 
> I’ve not put any effort into ordering the Reqs in the doc but will soon,
> in line with the ordering in [2] on next commit.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 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 2 Sep 2018, at 6:57 am, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
> 
>> Hi, Nick. You included 9 requirements - there are more than that both
>> here[1] and here[2]. Was there a reason to not include the others? Or is
>> this a result of the github labels not being complete?
>>
>> kc
>>
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/ProfileRoundup#Approved_requirements
>> [2] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/wiki/Profiles-Requirements-Analisys
>>
>> On 8/31/18 5:31 PM, Nicholas Car via GitHub wrote:
>>> nicholascar has just submitted a new pull request for
>>> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg:
>>>
>>> == Profile guidance doc ==
>>> correction of GitHub issue URIs;
>>> removal of ProfileDesc references;
>>> addition of all 9 approved Requirements;
>>> tidy of HTML
>>>
>>> See https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/328
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Karen Coyle
>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
>> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
>> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Sunday, 2 September 2018 15:16:53 UTC

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