Re: [uiml] Schedule of items to be completed before voting on theCommittee Specification

[Kris Luyten <kris.luyten@uhasselt.be>]

Additional items below:

On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 15:19 +0100, Robbie Schaefer wrote:
> Hi all,
>  
> some items to be considered:
>  
> - check if all used examples are consistent with the specification
> - minor point: check that examples use english names and are not
> potentially offensive
>   (Not everyone knows that "Sex Pistols" is a punk band ;-)
> - check all elements if they require some of the new elements as
> children (e.g. I found out that 
>   <when-true>, <when-false> and <by-default> should have <variable> as
> child)
> - Construct 4.0 DTD from the fragments of the spec
> - Even better, construct schema (The <alias>-Element is a nice example
> where the DTD is not
>   sufficient)
> - Create Metamodel from schema/DTD as Jean did with the 3.1-Version
> - Add the newly introduced Elements to section 3
> - Check if some other terms have to be defined in section 1.4 such as
> "Layout"
> - Provide (Informative) References for other specs and languages e.g.
> CTT etc.


More organizational stuff:

- Is there really sufficient difference (or progress) w.r.t. the 3.0
specification to have a 4.0 specification? (don't want to start a riot
here, just to make sure there is a good motivation for doing this).
- Can we split up the document, e.g. like the GRDDL specification does
it:
  => Specification Document (Metamodel, Namespaces, Schema and DTD
stuff, explanation for each element, mainly suitable for implementers of
UIML renderers and translators, but also for UIML users to get to know
the details)
  => Use Case Document (cases that cover the whole specification, with
examples, suitable for testing UIML renderers and translators but also
for UIML users)
  => Primer document  (introduction document to the technology, links to
implementation, suitable for UIML users)

 
> I have found several small points for improvement/corrections in the
> document. How should we proceed?
> Should all the TC-members edit with "track changes" on in parallel and
> James tries to update the input 
> he gets or should we pass the document as a token sequentially?

Can we do it in the Wiki?

Regards,
Kris 
-- 
Kris Luyten
Assistant Professor
Expertisecentrum voor Digitale Media - Hasselt University
Wetenschapspark 2, 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium
tel.: +32 (0)11 268411
email: kris.luyten@uhasselt.be
web: http://research.edm.uhasselt.be/kris