W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > October 2012

Re: early draft XProv v2 requirements/use cases

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 08:34:50 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2pq4f9a4l.fsf@nwalsh.com>
James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com> writes:
> I have committed a very rough and early version of Requirements doc.
>
>       http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/requirements-v2-jim.xml
>
> For todays review.

I think as a requirement 4.1 should read "Make parameters easier to
use/understand"; my proposal is a solution not a requiremnt.

What's the requirement in 4.6? I'm not objecting, I'd just like to
see it expressed as a requirement.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
Phone: +1 512 761 6676
www.marklogic.com

Received on Thursday, 18 October 2012 13:35:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 18 October 2012 13:35:24 GMT