W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > July to September 2011

unified requirements page on the wiki

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:53:45 +1200
Message-ID: <4E5C7AE9.30905@mcc.id.au>
To: SVG WG <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
Hello team.

I have amalgamated the "from mailing list" and "from tracker" SVG 2 
requirements wiki pages into the one page:

http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/wiki/SVG2_Requirements_Input

Cyril, you can now add in the SVG Tiny 1.2 features into that page.

We discussed previously how we might quantify our responses to the 
requirements here so that we can settle on which feature we will work on 
in the SVG 2 timeframe.  One method mention was to have a few different 
axes along which we'd rate the proposals -- priority, difficulty, 
importance, or something along those lines.  (Apologies for not 
remembering exactly.)

I'm wondering though whether that is too complex, and we should just 
settle for a single valued response.  We essentially need to collapse 
the difficulty/importance/etc. into a single value so we can have a 
totally ordered list of features anyway, so why not do that up front. 
Also, if we don't have consensus on definitely including or definitely 
excluding features then we'll need to discuss them anyway.

So for the moment, I have added a comments <table> for each item listed 
on the wiki page.  You can add your comment by entering one of these 
four possibilities:

{{ReqYes|Name|Rationale}}
{{ReqMaybe|Name|Rationale}}
{{ReqNo|Name|Rationale}}
{{ReqUnsure|Name|Rationale}}

for example:

{{ReqYes|Cameron|Everybody wants this feature so we should just include 
it.}}

If anyone objects to this rating scheme and wants something more fine 
grained, reply to this mail so we can discuss it briefly.  Otherwise, 
please start looking at each of the items and putting your comments in. 
  Some of the entries might be completely unspecific.  People who are 
advocating for these entries should add some more details in this case.

I have begun putting my comments in for the first few items on the list, 
and will continue with the remainder later in the week.

I hope we can discuss some of these items and maybe assign actions to 
write more specific text or proposals for some of them at this week's call.

Thanks,

Cameron
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2011 05:54:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:20:13 UTC