- From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 09:00:21 +0800
- To: W3C AIKR CG <public-aikr@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMXe=SrUm7JMOHRysyUEgbj+Nnkyzqu6YTddUS+6WeMDtaOJeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Owen after trying out the stratnav application in a demo last week, , I look forward to be working on the stratml plan for this CG in the app My personal opinion as a software/systems engineer. is that the distinction between stratML 1 and 2 is not good. It makes the schema a bit brittle, easily breakable and awkward to get ones head and parser around. The first thing I would do if I had to use it as a standard would be to have a single schema. Some of the elements may be mandatory, like hearders and some elements may be optional (so that the user always have to insert the mandatory elements but can select which optional elements they need in their instance). This would enhance its robustness and usability The tool itself may benefit from some tweaking as discussed in offilst email It is only after we see the output of the parser that the schema can be fully evaluated and only then we ll know if stratml may need additional iterations to be optimized/make it smooth Thought I would throw my two cents in case you decide to develop it further. I think it could be very useful but it may need to evolve a bit to fit the use cases Ill get my hands on the plan as soon as I can. this month I hope Hope veryone stays safe PDM
Received on Sunday, 3 May 2020 01:01:14 UTC