W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > June 2018

Re: Plenary agenda June 5

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 12:13:53 -0700
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <5334fee8-3128-c266-11a0-06e51eef6f9c@kcoyle.net>
Ah, those are the ones that I see as being requirements for profiles,
and that would be included in the Guidance document where it talks about
the functionality of profiles. I read them as being "these are the
things a profile needs to have to be a profile". So we may be in sync on
that. Now, which are the ones that are "these are the things the spec we
are writing needs to accomplish"?


On 6/4/18 11:31 AM, Annette Greiner wrote:
> some examples:
>   * Requirement: Profiles may provide rules on cardinality of terms
>     (including “recommended”) [ID41] (5.41) [profile]
>   * Requirement: Profiles may provide rules governing value validity
>     [ID41] (5.41) [profile]
>   * Requirement: Profiles may express dependencies between elements of
>     the vocabulary (if A then not B, etc.) [ID41] (5.41) [profile]
>   * Requirement: Profiles can have rules for data value validation,
>     including pick lists [ID46] (5.46) [profile]
> On 6/2/18 12:17 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>> I'm not sure which ones you see as requirements for a spec. Can you give
>> a couple of examples?
>> My take is that as we were developing the use cases most of them were
>> about requirements for profiles, not requirements for a profile guidance
>> document. And we would take those requirements for profiles and turn
>> them into a guidance document.
>> kc
>> On 6/1/18 9:06 PM, Annette Greiner wrote:
>>> Are these supposed to be requirements as in
>>>   "these are the things the spec we are writing needs to accomplish"
>>> or requirements as in
>>>   "these are the things a profile needs to have to be a profile"?
>>> To me, the requirements listed on the agenda read as the latter, which
>>> are the contents of a spec (e.g., they use terms like "can" and "may"),
>>> but other requirements in the GDoc read as the former, which are
>>> requirements for a spec.
>>> -Annette
>>> On 6/1/18 6:54 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>>> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2018.06.05
>>>> Jaroslav organized the requirements into categories, and the first few
>>>> categories are in the agenda for our discussion. PLEASE take a look at
>>>> them and be ready to vote. We will try to vote on entire categories
>>>> unless there are objections to specific requirements. If you will not be
>>>> at the meeting but wish to comment or vote, you may do so in email and
>>>> we will do our best to include your views.
> -- 
> Annette Greiner
> NERSC Data and Analytics Services
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Monday, 4 June 2018 19:14:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:04 UTC