OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oiic-formation-discuss message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Use Cases

2008/6/23 Sander Marechal <s.marechal@jejik.com>:

>> We want the TC to deliver profiles, based around the use cases
>> we can suggest.
> I would like to see that too yes. The TC should be free to write more
> use-cases of course (and circulate them, together with the ones we write
> for public review). The TC should also be free to ignore our use-cases
> where they're not applicable. For example, my two suggested use-cases so
> far deal with subset profiles. If the TC comes up with a different
> profiling system, like creating multiple interop profiles based on
> feature sets (ODF/charts, ODF/tables, ODF/text, etcetera) then my
> use-cases don't apply.

Why not? I'm supportive of multiple classes of use cases?
subsets, user profiles, application profiles ....
I'd like the TC to review them all and develop them
into something, some set, some how, that helps

> But I'd like the use-cases we write to carry a little more weight than
> just being merely informative. Is there any middle-ground between the
> two? E.g. tell the TC that unless public review finds serious flaws in
> our use-cases they should stick with them?

<grin/> have your cake and eat it Sander?
You seem OK to have the TC reject an example profile (above)
yet you want them to carry weight?

If the TC have a deliverable of 'profiles' ... how about
adding 'based around the examples given below'
then list a refined subset of them?

weasle words but it bumps up the weight?


Dave Pawson

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]