W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > September 2011

Re: "Design user stories and models for user interfaces"?? - IMPORTANT

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 21:50:57 +0200
Message-ID: <4E6679A1.80402@few.vu.nl>
To: public-xg-lld@w3.org
On 9/6/11 5:28 PM, Tom Baker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 12:45:01AM +0200, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>> I do like the new heading very much. But I've got a question on this
>> sub-section, still, while checking the section. Why is in in the
>> recommendations "for standard bodies and participants"?  It seems to me that
>> it would fit better amont the recs for library leadership (from the
>> perspective of the ones who make decisions on starting such endeavors) or the
>> recs for system designers.  Any opinion?
> Very good point.  Standards bodies will not design services, but library
> leaders can direct the services to be designed.  Besides, library leaders get
> off relatively easy, with just two Recommendations to follow, while standards
> bodies have four...  Moving this point to the Library Leadership section would
> balance things out -- three and three :-)

Yes :-)
But on second thought, if we keep the section like it is now, its title "Design and test user services based on Linked Data capabilities" reads naturally like a documentation for "designers"!

> BTW, we have headings for bodies, participants, designers, librarians,
> archivists, and... leadership.  Shouldn't that be "For library leaders"?

Unless there's a strong argument against, I prefer to keep it like this. "leaders" has a strong connotation to me, which is less obvious in "leadership". A bit as if "leadership" was leaving more room for people who are not formal leaders (library director, department heads) to step in and battle for moving things forwards at a higher-level. But maybe that's just me.

Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 19:49:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:58 UTC