Re: When to dive into technical details

On 11/20/2014 02:36 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> I just wanted to quickly react one of Peter's statements during the call today
> - we ran out of time there.
> Peter (correct me if I am wrong) stated that it sounds premature to work on
> technical details while we have not formalized on the various ways in which
> shapes can be associated with graphs and resources, and related pre-work.

That is indeed what I said.

> While I agree in the value of capturing such theoretical concepts on our wiki
> pages, I also believe there is very much value in working out specific
> solutions, examples and language paradigms. We already have several specific
> starting points, and it will be informative for the group on what impact the
> high-level design decisions have in real terms. Both can and should go hand in
> hand. Of course no choices are made, but I would not want to spend the next
> half a year on nothing but high-level discussions if there are already
> specific solution candidates on the table.

There are indeed proposals on the table.

> Holger

I have no problem with putting out information on how the proposals handle 
particular situations.   However, teleconference time is a valuable resource. 
  Right now we should be talking about requirements and supporting evidence 
during teleconferences, so that we can get through this phase as quickly as 
possible and on to the work of putting together a solution.

There are lots of ways that working group members can find out more about 
particular proposals.  They can read papers, look at slide decks, ask 
questions in email, and even call up proponents of the proposals.  Proponents, 
and others, can add information to the stories providing information on how a 
proposal handles the story.


PS:  I am rather dismayed as to how many stories/use cases have been 
accumulated already.  The thought of having many more coming from Dublin Core 
is frightening.

Received on Friday, 21 November 2014 14:00:53 UTC