Re: one more requirement

From: Craig A. Finseth (fin@finseth.com)
Date: Mon, Jan 11 1999


Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:49:00 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199901111949.NAA12976@isis.visi.com>
From: "Craig A. Finseth" <fin@finseth.com>
To: miked@tbt.com
Cc: www-tv@w3.org
Subject: Re: one more requirement

   What I am proposing is that the exact syntax I mentioned be added to the
   requirements.

   As I mentioned, it may not be appropriate to add this to the application
   scenarios, and can be put into the requirements document if folks feel that
   is more appropriate.

In my opinion, it is not appropriate to add to the application
examples document.

As we are now in the process of reviewing the requirements document
itself, it is appropriate for discussion in that context.

At this time, you have made a proposal (to include in the
requirements) and I have seen at least one objection to its inclusion.
What we need is a process for resolving this (and presumably other)
differences of opinion via the list.

Phil?  I'm open to suggestions here...

Craig