W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: [TF-ENT] Requirements and Issues

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:50:28 +0100
Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <82B14387-B999-44DC-90F1-5A7A0E344E65@deri.org>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
I have no objections in using the issues tracker also for time- 
permitting features,
but I guess we should check this (I just see Lee answered along the  
same lines.)

BTW, apologies, I am lagging behind on my pass over the entailment  
document and
collecting issues, got caught up with unforeseen issues and need to  
this from my side to end of this week.


On 29 Sep 2009, at 12:44, Bijan Parsia wrote:

> On 29 Sep 2009, at 04:19, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> > Is there going to be a requirements phase?
> We're in one.
> > We seem to discussing requirements in the guise of implicit
> > assumptions in the proposed text.
> The text was a dumping of thoughts to try to provide a concrete focus
> for discussion..by and large we tried to include design alternatives.
> I personally find it easier to discuss requirements in context. There
> should be a pull back at some point.
> > How are issues going to be handled?
> > The WG has an issue tracker - is that going to be used?  Who arises
> > issues?
> I guess that's for the chairs.
> Cheers,
> Bijan.

Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland,  
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 13:58:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:57 UTC