Re: Actions for all of us — from today's call

Hi all,
Big kudos for this first draft presented by the editors of this document. My 2 cents below

> A.  Review the Use Case draft and be ready to vote on transitioning it to first public working draft (FPWD) in next week's call. [1]

a- I also agree to remove the name of the contributors in each use cases, and maybe use 
the contributors and/or aknowlegment sections for listing their names.

b- We might also need to add a matrix table to summarize UCs vs challenges/requirements as we had somewhere in the wiki?!

c- I've noticed that the keyword "should" is not properly/or even not used in the document according to RFC2119. 

Regarding the use cases:
 1- Use case #1
   In "Propose use of dcat properties dct:accrualPeriodicity and dcat:contactpoint", add reference to dcat
   and links to dcat:accrualPeriodicity and dcat:contactpoint.

 2- Use case #6
   +Add technical challenges. Summarize the text under "Current Data Summary" to make the technical challenges and/or use to complete the story.
   + Make a link to [ESWC2013] with the reference "Stefan Bischof and Axel Polleres. RDFS with attribute equations via SPARQL rewriting. In Proc. Of the 10th ESWC, vol. 7882 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), p. 335-350, May 2013. Springer".

3- Q. What to do with UCs without challenges nor requires section? See Use Cases #3, #4 #10, #20 ? We might see if they can have at least requirements and challenges.


Cheers,
Ghislain