Re: ISSUE-7: Mental models?

This issue was raised to track a concern that had come up during the
face-to-face in San Jose.

[[

  tlr: why should it only be 1 conceptual model?
  mez: maybe there won't be just one, but there is no indication that ..
  ... -we- -want- to put out multiple...
  ... compare to cars: we want to be able to have everyone operate safely, even if they don't operate the same way ...
  ... discussion of mental model and whether or not to include it ...
  ... we should discourage indicators that lead to false mental models ...
  ... if conceptual model goes in, it needs to go in the glossary ..
  
]] -- http://www.w3.org/2007/01/30-wsc-minutes#discuss9.1

I think there was a suggestion in what you said at that meeting, and
I think the concrete proposal burden is on you for this one.

Cheers,
-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>






On 2007-03-23 12:23:31 -0400, Mary Ellen Zurko wrote:
> From: Mary Ellen Zurko <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
> To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> Cc: tlr@w3.org
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:23:31 -0400
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-7: Mental models?
> X-Spam-Level: 
> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.5
> 
> Thomas, if this Issue is not yet addressed in the current version of 
> wsc-usecases, can you pleaes make a concrete proposal? 
> 
>           Mez
> 
> Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l 333-6389)
> Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect
>

Received on Friday, 23 March 2007 19:27:25 UTC