- 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