moving the use case document to FPWD

Hi - in today's teleconf<http://www.w3.org/2014/03/12-csvw-minutes.html> we agreed a number of things to complete for Monday.


1)      [Eric] add use case #16 City of Palo Alto tree data

2)      [Eric] add use case #21 Displaying locations of care homes on a map

3)      [Davide] complete amendments to use cases about "intelligent preview" and "representing entities and facts" - see emails here<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-csv-wg/2014Mar/0055.html> and here<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-csv-wg/2014Mar/thread.htmlhttp:/lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-csv-wg/2014Mar/0054.html>.

4)      [Eric] tease out and make explicit the requirements in use cases #7, #12 and #17 ... noting the implied "microsyntax" requirement in #7

5)      [Jeremy] renumber use cases into sequential order

6)      [Jeremy] cluster requirements as proposed by JeniT

We agreed that there were not, at this time, latent requirements from CSV-LD or CSV2RDF discussion threads.

Also, Eric: we previously talked about adding a use case about ncdump<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-csv-wg/2014Feb/0200.html> (netcdf dump). Is this still necessary / feasible?

Davide: it seems Eric has a lot still to do ... are you able to take action #2 (adding use case #21 Displaying locations of care homes on a map). Please refer to my earlier email<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-csv-wg/2014Feb/0193.html> for my thoughts on that use case (not much to say - but could be helpful).

I'll do actions #5 and #6 on Monday morning based on the structure of the document I see at that point in time - so expect the use case numbers to have changed by Monday lunch time!

Please let me know if I've got any of this wrong :)

BR, Jeremy