- From: Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de>
- Date: 20 Aug 2014 16:45:54 +0200
- To: "Crawford, Mark" <mark.crawford@sap.com>
- Cc: "internal-socbizcg@w3.org" <internal-socbizcg@w3.org>, "public-social-interest@w3.org" <public-social-interest@w3.org>
Hi Mark, > The Social WG is bound by tighter IP rules than that of the Social IG, Really? I was not aware of that. > In terms of Use Cases, the Social WG is focused on use cases for their > specific charter items which are very narrow in scope as compared to > our broader scope and I therefore expect broader use cases in line > with that scope. Yes, there may be some overlap, but I would rather > have the overlap than miss out on an important aspect of what I > expect we will be addressing. I do agree that no aspects (even seemingly unimportant ones) should be missed. But the use cases of the Social WG are all automatically also relevant for the Social Web IG (at least that is my POV). So the more general question is: How can the WG and the IG collaborate without unnecessarily duplicating work, copying content or spending time on synchronizing two separate sets of Use Cases where one is essentially a subset of the other one? Maybe a Wiki page is not even the most appropriate tool.. Cheers, Andreas
Received on Wednesday, 20 August 2014 14:46:21 UTC