Re: dxwg-ACTION-302: Request chairs to identify procedure for closing issues about requirement definitions and urge ucr team to consolidate and close such issues as appropriate.

Even though the action is on Lars to present thus, as we're awake I can at
least pass on some pointers..

#72-75

205, 207, 217

etc.

a lot of these are requirements, or older  version of requirements
(possibly)

Many (or most)  of these requirements are motivating requirements addressed
by the nature and FPWDs of the conneg-by-ap and profiles vocabulary - so we
hope as long as the UCR is up to date they can be closed?  We've marked a
few as due-for-closing pending this direction.



On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 08:33, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:

> Hi, thanks. I'm not sure exactly what is meant by "about requirement
> definitions" - we have a number of issues that are copies of
> requirements but that are not really about the definitions. Can you give
> a few examples? (Obviously a definitive list would be ideal, but I won't
> assume that you have one at hand.)
>
> kc
>
> On 2/20/19 1:00 PM, Dataset Exchange Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> > dxwg-ACTION-302: Request chairs to identify procedure for closing issues
> about requirement definitions and urge ucr team to consolidate and close
> such issues as appropriate.
> >
> > https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/302
> >
> > Assigned to: Lars G. Svensson
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
>
>