- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:30:22 -0500
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
You may recall from our 1 Jun telcon... "DanC suggests F2F meeting goal to be to select a design(s) (e.g., SeRQL, RDQL, Joseki, etc.) that meets the DAWG requirements" -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0503.html Actually, we may select a design that does not, yet, meet all our requirements; our issues list will have an issue for each discrepancy between requirements and design. The straightforward way to resolve such an issue is to expand the design, but our design work may very well bring up new information that merits reopening requirements decisions. So another way to resolve such an issue is to refine or demote the relevant requirement. Everything is negotiable until the fat lady sings, though reopening old decisions requires new information. Picking an initial design will give us something to raise issues against. We'll go thru whatever documentation we have for our initial design, section by section, and collect issues. A while back, Yoshio asked, "don't we have to go through the document, I mean, check if the issues in the document should be in the requirements or design objects?" -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0452.html I think the survey work by EricP and others will become particularly relevant as we evaluate our initial design. (oops; telcon in 2 minutes; gotta wrap this up...) Then we'll move from raising issues to closing them, publishing working drafts occasionally as we go, culminating in last call when we've closed all our issues. So... I owe the WG a ftf agenda 2 weeks before our 14-15 Jul meeting, i.e. around 1 July. I'd like to have all the initial design candidates in that agenda. So if there's a design that you'd like the WG to consider that hasn't been evaluated, get it evalutated! (recall that we're looking for evaluations by someone _other_ than the designer). -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 2004 10:29:42 UTC