- From: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 13:57:03 +0200
- To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>
- Cc: "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFVDz42B+OsJke9x4UJdvtpKWP84rfn1EEKqzgPu3O7sVwsiVA@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Kerry, About issue-20 <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/20>: So there is agreement within the SSN team that the requirement <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#ReferenceExternalVocabularies> is both clear (to the team and to the general public) and in scope? If I close issue-20, the requirement will stay as it is. To me it is not entirely clear from the minutes that this is the wish of the SSN team. I have closed action-186 and issue-24 by updating the UCR document. The minutes show that you took time for careful wording of the requirement, thank you for that. Regards, Frans On 13 July 2016 at 00:17, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au> wrote: > The ssn meeting discussed these issues this morning. We resolved to invite > the UCR editors to > > (a) Close issue-20 (see action-184 on Frans) > > (b) Fix issue-24 by replacing requirement by "show how the ssn > ontology can be applied in the context of lightweight IoT needs". See > action-186 on Frans. > > For the latter there was some suggestion that that new requirement then > needs to be further refined to more specific requirements, but the meeting > felt that this was sufficient as phrased here. > > > > Frans, please take this phrasing of the requirement as the intention of > the meeting not necessarily quite the right wording which you may prefer to > modify. > > > > See minutes: https://www.w3.org/2016/07/12-sdwssn-minutes > > > > Kerry > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 13 July 2016 11:57:35 UTC