- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:07:31 +0100
- To: "Ceolin, D." <d.ceolin@vu.nl>, W3C CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
Hi Davide, Eric, Jeremy, As I said on the call, thank you very much for doing this work, which is very useful. Some comments as I went through it: 1. There seem to be a few requirements that are about what should be defined within the data model. Could these be moved to a separate category? 2. Handling the parsing of CSV-like files into the tabular data model is out of scope for the Working Group (eg R-MultipleHeadingRows) though it’s still useful to capture them. Can we keep them in the document but in a Deferred pile? (These can form evidence that the scope of the WG needs to be expanded when rechartered, should that happen.) 3. Handling the provision of CSV files through some kind of access protocol, as in R-RandomAccess is out of scope for the WG. Again, can we put them in the Deferred pile please? 4. As Davide points out, there are a lot of requirements that feed into R-AnnotationAndSupplementaryInfo, but it’s definitely useful to have the more granular requirements. What I was wondering was whether there were any requirements in R-AnnotationAndSupplementaryInfo that aren’t covered in the more granular requirements, and if so what they were? I have some other comments specifically about R-CellValueMicroSyntax but I’ll put them in a separate mail. Jeni -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com/
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 16:08:14 UTC