- From: Daniel Rubin <rubin@med.stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 06:56:01 -0800
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>,SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
I regret that I have not been able to attend the tcon this week (and next) because of conflicting travel. The SKOS requirement list looks very good, but I would like to ask the communities I've been working with to review it and comment. Is this appropriate, and is there a process for collecting feedback on the requirements? Thanks Daniel At 01:58 AM 1/31/2007, Antoine Isaac wrote: >Hi all, > >I have updated the current requirement list for SKOS, trying to tkae >into account what we discussed during the F2F meeting. >http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/CandidateReqList >Amongst the modifications, some rewording, plus the distinction >between accepted ("hard") and candidate ("soft") requirements. There >are still a couple of todos about validating some moves (or stays) >from one status to the other. >Feel free to comment, if you have memories fresher than mine or than >the meeting minutes'. > >Notice that this list makes extensive reference to the (also >updated) issue sandbox I had created for the F2F, which in turn >refers to the requirements.http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosIssuesSandbox >Of course this is not the definitive place where we should handle >these issues on a formal basis: for that there will be either the >existing (empty) wiki page >http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosIssues or the W3C issue >tracker, depending on Jon's choice. >I just wanted to ease the work of people who have an action on >working out specific issues while this choice was not made. The goal >is to easily see whether an update on a given issue implies an >update on the associated requirement, and to signal it to the >requirement editors. > >Cheers, > >Antoine
Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2007 14:56:14 UTC