- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:49:00 +0200
- To: <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Hi, (sorry I have to throw last-minute regrets for today's call, so I'm sending my 2 cents by mail) Yes I'd trust the work done at [1], but it may be good to see indeed whether we end with the same set of requirements if we start from the use cases, as this would be the logical step. NB: I'm *not* going to look at the content of [1] now: so that if you need someone to do checks in the direction UC->R then it can be done by someone who is not biased by having looked at what the end result should be ;-) Cheers, Antoine On 04/09/17 11:01, Svensson, Lars wrote: > Hello, > >> Perhaps the "negotiation by profiles" team (and I am happy to put my hand >> up for this) can identify which requirements affect negotiation - this is >> probably quite minimal - maybe just a definition of profile, some descriptions >> and use of HTTP identifiers, > > Ruben, Herbert and I have collected requirements for profile negotiation [1]. We're probably not fully complete yet but the most important should be there. I have the impression that we list requirements that are not yet in the UCR document, so perhaps we need more use cases to back up those... > > [1] https://github.com/ProfileNegotiation/I-D-Accept--Schema/wiki/Requirements > > Best, > > Lars > >> On Fri, 1 Sep 2017 at 01:48 Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >> All, >> >> We have a very important task on our agenda now, which is to determine >> the requirements for the three deliverables. This is also quite a >> complex task. Although this is directly a task for the UCR group, it >> needs the attention of the entire working group. >> >> Ideally, at this point we would be able to gather together in room with >> Post-It(tm) notes (and a lot of coffee) and we could organize the >> requirements around concepts and deliverables as a group activity. As >> our next face-to-face is much too far away, we need to find a way to do >> this work virtually. >> >> Some possible organizing principles are: >> >> - which requirements are for which deliverables? (Yes, some requirements >> may be valid for more than one deliverable.) >> - what are the logical categories that requirements fall into within >> each deliverable? >> - what is the priority for each requirement? (e.g. absolutely required; >> required if possible; nice to have but not required) >> >> Following are some examples from previous working groups that the team >> is aware of. If you know of others please reply with them. >> >> - https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/#challenges (DWBP challenges) >> - https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/#requirements (DWBP requirements) >> - https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl-ucr/#requirements (SHACL requirements) >> >> Please give some time to this and share an ideas with the group. >> >> kc for the team >> -- >> Karen Coyle >> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal) >> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Monday, 4 September 2017 13:49:29 UTC