Re: PLEASE READ: Prioritization questionnaire

On 01/14/2011 04:03 PM, Dan Burnett wrote:
> There is no way in the survey to do that, and that is on purpose. From a
> standards perspective the only difference between the two is one of
> timing, and I have seen groups spend absurd amounts of time trying to
> distinguish (as a group) between the two when what really matters most
> is what people are willing to work on *today*.

I'd be willing to work on both specs in the same time, v1, an v2
(if we'll have such), but I'd expect v1 to stabilize sooner and have 
implementations sooner than v2.

>
> Essentially anything that we do not want today will only happen in the
> future if there is interest to work on it at that time.
>
> Now, if what you want is a way to say "we should never do that, for any
> reason, at any time between now and infinity", that is a discussion that
> will only be necessary if there is otherwise resounding interest in
> actually doing that thing now. I am sure that a discussion will ensue in
> that situation, questionnaire or no questionnaire.
>
> The goal here is to have a general priority ordering on which
> requirements fulfill the interests of the broadest numbers of
> organizations (as a proxy for the industry in general) so we can focus
> on those first.
Ok, sounds like I should prioritize then the requirements we
need for "v1".


-Olli


> We can work on supporting others later (only) as there
> is interest.
>
> -- dan
>
> On Jan 14, 2011, at 6:21 AM, Bjorn Bringert wrote:
>
>> There is only a single boolean choice for each requirement. How should
>> we express the distinction between "should not address" and "address
>> later" (aka "do it in v2")?
>>
>> /Bjorn
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Dan Burnett <dburnett@voxeo.com> wrote:
>>> Group,
>>>
>>> The prioritization questionnaire is now ready and available at
>>> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/45260/ReqPri02/
>>>
>>> As with the earlier requirements interest questionnaire, this one
>>> asks for
>>> only one input per Member organization. If you are not officially a
>>> member
>>> of the Incubator Group, you should be :) However, in the mean time
>>> you can
>>> fill out the text version (linked from the page above) and send it to
>>> me,
>>> Michael Bodell, or the list and we will incorporate it into the results.
>>> Please, only one reply per organization.
>>>
>>> The questionnaire is open through Wednesday of next week. If you need an
>>> extension please let me know.
>>>
>>> -- dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bjorn Bringert
>> Google UK Limited, Registered Office: Belgrave House, 76 Buckingham
>> Palace Road, London, SW1W 9TQ
>> Registered in England Number: 3977902
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 14 January 2011 14:20:37 UTC