Re: The smaller bites (was Re: Lee's feature proposal)

On Monday 04 May 2009 20:39:14 Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> So my question - for every feature to add to the WG schedule, what would
> you remove or deprioritize?  

Well, since forward-chaining and add triples to the model has worked 
excellently for us so far, I could drop the OWL stuff and service 
descriptions are not too interesting either, but I do not advocate this 
solution, as it is beside my point.

Both SurfaceSyntax and FunctionLibrary are on Lee's priority list as "time 
permit" features, so what I am suggesting is a process to do this in a way 
that will maximise community involvement and taking the burden off of the 
shoulders of the WG as a whole. 

My suggestion implies that there cannot not just be a wishlist of items to do, 
someone has to actually accept the risk of committing time to a feature that 
may not be accepted by the WG. Thus, there is a very high threshold to submit 

The WG is also free respond to a submission with "this is not ready for WG 
review, you need to do more work". Consequently, when a feature is accepted 
by the WG for review, a lot of work has allready been done. If it has come 
that far, the WG should accept the feature if it doesn't come into conflict 
with overarching principles of the language. Note again that this process 
only concerns SurfaceSyntax and FunctionLibrary, not the rest of the work we 
are doing here. The assumption is that these things are not very intrusive 
and costs little to implement.

So, this is not a rubberstamp process, it offloads a lot of risk onto each 
champion, but rewards them by giving them a pretty good chance of it getting 
in if they complete the task.

Kind regards 

Kjetil Kjernsmo
Senior Knowledge Engineer
Mobile: +47 986 48 234


Computas AS  PO Box 482, N-1327 Lysaker | Phone:+47 6783 1000 | Fax:+47 6783 

Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 08:47:21 UTC