Re: PLEASE READ: Prioritization questionnaire

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi> wrote:
> 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".

That's my interpretation as well.


>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
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 14:26:09 UTC