W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > June 2015

Use of the word 'standard' in the UCR document.

From: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:59:03 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFVDz42WVZbTGtnHd9eXZ8uviH17zDttqFLO=v85heHgXF2gsQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>
Cc: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Hello Alejandro,

The UCR document currently has some requirements that use phasing like
"There should be a standard for..." or "There should be standards for...".
I recall you had an objection against this way of formulating requirements
earlier in an e-mail message, but I can't recall the reason.

The issue came up again during today's conference because the same phrasing
is used in the proposed UCR requirement (ISSUE-10
<http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/10>). I liked a point that
Andrea made: there could already be multiple standards for doing something.
I think we want to avoid a situation where a requirement can be said to be
met by multiple competing standards. That does not help the community. So I
think we should replace phrases like  "There should be a standard for..."
with something else.

I would like to propose to change it to  "There should be a best practice
for...". That should make it clear that we are looking for a single optimal
way of doing something.

What do you think about such a general change? I understood that you have
an objection against changing 'standard' to 'best practice', but I haven't
understood the nature of that objection yet.

Regards,
Frans



-- 
Frans Knibbe
Geodan
President Kennedylaan 1
1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)

T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347
E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl
www.geodan.nl
disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2015 14:59:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 2 September 2016 12:03:03 UTC