Re: [cgmo-webcgm] Agenda for telecon

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 07:13 AM 11/6/2007 -0800, Cruikshank, David W wrote:
>Here's the agenda for the telecon Wednesday, Nov 7.
>
>Stuart and I are in LA for ATA meetings, but will be on the telecon.

One key agenda items is:

[[[
WebCGM 2.1 requirements document
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/25996/WebCGM_21_Requirements.html 

1.      Is the format OK?
2.      Animation as 3 separate requirements?
3.      Use cases?
]]]

I have an idea and a suggestion.

The suggestion:
----------
We should assign an AI to each TC-er.  A couple of rqts items for each 
AI.  The AI would be to check the item as written, check its content 
against its history in the archives, and possibly generate more detailed 
Use Case stuff (see next).

The AIs should be assigned tomorrow, due by the end of the 
month.  (Including tentative assignments to "regrets".)

The idea:
----------
Comparing it to the 2.0 requirements document [2], we already have 
considerably more detail.  And [2] was considered adequate as a foundation 
document to start 2.0 work and to launch a W3C WG.

I sort of like the conciseness.  But I also like use cases to back up the 
requirement.  There are some briefly stated in the current text.  If we 
want more, how about the possibility of putting them in a separate 
document, cross linked with the Rqts Doc, leaving the Rqts. Doc concise and 
quickly readable?

-Lofton.

[2] http://www.cgmopen.org/technical/WebCGM_20_Requirements.html