Re: [regrep-semantic] revised SCM Use Case document (second attempt to send)

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Evan,

Understood!  There's two things working at odds here - one need
to keep things simple and low-tech - essentially the use cases are
a promotional item to draw in potential sponsors and participants,
while on the other hand - the engineers want precise definitions
and exactness, and it all has to fit on one page... ; -)

Cheers, DW.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
To: <regrep-semantic@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: [regrep-semantic] revised SCM Use Case document (second attempt
to send)


>
> David Webber wrote:
>
> >Attached is my revisions to this.  Use Case 2 looked very good - only
> >couple of nits there, Use Case 1 also - most changes made sense - I
> >retained the reference to creating the noun mechanism but updated it
> >to fit with your edits.  I changed reference to STEP to community -
> >(noone knows what the ISO standard code is!?) - but everyone
> >recognizes STEP and UDEF, et al. ...
>
> Neither of us used the ISO standard code (10303 for STEP).  I included
> the official designation for the subcommittee that created the STEP
> standard(s) and a number of other standards for Industrial Data exchange.
> I assumed that a reader might need to dereference that designation, but
> that could easily be done with little chance of an incorrect
interpretation.
> Of course, I was trying to do as little damage as possible to the meaning
> and flow of your text.
>
> -Evan
>