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

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

From: Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 16:35:35 -0400
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: public-xg-lld@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110906203535.GA83888@julius>
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 09:50:57PM +0200, Antoine Isaac wrote:
> >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"!

But then it should be under "For data and systems designers".  Right now, it is under "For
standards bodies and participants"!  I do think it would fit well in "For data and systems 

> >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.

I think of "leaders" not just as formal leaders, but as including, for example
"thought leaders"...


Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 20:36:07 UTC

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