Re: [office-metadata] Groups - Metadata SC meeting modified

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Bruce,

Bruce D'Arcus wrote:

>
> On Jul 26, 2006, at 8:49 AM, patrick@durusau.net wrote:
>
>> I think we need to discuss revision to the current draft of use cases to
>> cast it in more traditional user task format.
>
>
> Just out of curiosity, is this based on some comments?  In any case, 
> do you have a list of them that you think are in particular need of 
> this that you could post now? Perhaps we can try to tackle some of 
> them before the call?
>
No, no comments, just re-reading what we have written.

I will try to post some comments on the use cases as they exist by tonight.

>> In order to maintain some forward momentum, however, I also think we 
>> need
>> to discuss how we are going to develop requirements.
>
>
> Yes, good idea. One of the reasons I mentioned categorizing the use 
> cases is that I thought they might have some different requirements, 
> and that we might then be more easily able to divide up that work.
>
+1

> I kind of know what I think the requirements are for my category of 
> use case (custom solutions; fields backed up by data), but not others.
>
Might be useful for people to start posting requirements for use cases 
of interest to them and then we can discuss over the mailing list.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick

> Bruce
>
>
>
>

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Patrick@Durusau.net
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!