Re: review of Document Overview

Ian Horrocks a écrit :
> As per your suggestion I removed the one sentence explanation of the 
> meaning of "to all intents and purposes", replacing it with a pointer to 
> NF&R. This will need to be fixed to a more precise reference to the 
> location of the relevant section when it has been added.

My opinion may not have strong weight considering that I am not an 
author nor an editor of any of the documents, but I am a supporter of 
Sandro's Venn diagram. I do think it is useful. When I see it, I 
instantly understand what is going on. Yet, I also know people who would 
not even notice it. Actually, I know someone who hardly can build up 
Ikea furniture because the guidelines are only figures. He would like 
text-only explanations. On the contrary, it would be difficult for me to 
make the furniture without figures.

Some people will not find this figure useful because it's redundant with 
the text. Some others may not be able to very well notice where the text 
is actually talking about these set inclusions, but would understand it 
easily thanks to the diagram. Finally, in spite of Peter's argument on 
possible ambiguities (and the fact that "less is more"), I really cannot 
see any harmfulness in keeping such a diagram.

> I heard different opinions about Figure 2, so I didn't do anything on 
> that pending a decision from the WG. It seems slightly ridiculous for 
> such a minor issue, but I suggest that we put it on this weeks agenda 
> for discussion and disposition vote on it.

I agree it is a ridiculously minor issue, but since it generates so much 
debate, I guess we need a vote on that...


Regards,
-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
Post-doctoral researcher at:
Digital Enterprise Research Institute
National University of Ireland, Galway
IDA Business Park
Lower Dangan
Galway, Ireland
antoine.zimmermann@deri.org
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/

Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 09:59:55 UTC