- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:04:21 +0200
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Cc: "'www-qa-wg@w3.org'" <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <1118851461.15789.108.camel@stratustier>
Le mercredi 15 juin 2005 à 11:45 -0400, Karl Dubost a écrit : > Le 05-06-15 à 10:54, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux a écrit : > > But I can't tell at this point why we are introducing the concept of > > "umbrella specification" since I don't know what we're trying to > > explain > > about them or what we're trying to convey through them. > > Usability. If I understand correctly, you're saying that we should convey somewhere that umbrella specifications are good for usability when there are more than one documents involved in defining a technology. Is that right? > > Well, I see that you want this as a user, but how does this fit in > > Variability in Specifications? What are the advanced topics regarding > > variability and/or conformance that need to be made about these > > types of > > specifications? > > Ok that is clearer ;) Here there are two issues and we are not > discussing the same ;) > > * What do we mean by "Umbrella Specification" and why it's useful? > * Should "Umbrella Specification" concept be in a document which > is addressing variability in specifications? Yup; but at this point, since I don't see where Umbrella specs fit in ViS, I don't know where it fits at all in our documents. Do you have any suggestion? Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2005 16:04:25 UTC