[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xri] Proposed syntax changes
I certainly agree on the need for requirements for all proposed changes. A few notes/suggestions about this process: 1) The "Introduction/Motivations" section of each proposal document (for issues that have a proposal document) was a start on these requirements, however I completely agree we need a more explicit requirements section. I will update all three change management pages to refer to "Requirements/Proposal Page" and commence work on adding a requirements to the proposal pages for all issues. 2) As I mentioned in email to Gabe and Mike yesterday, frequently it is design and implementation experience that surfaces requirements that are otherwise hard to see in advance. I encourage all implementers on the TC to contribute to the requirements section of any proposal page for a revision you are interested in because it is your implementation experience that uncovered these requirements. 3) I agree we should make requirements discussion the first part of our agenda in discussing issues both on the list and in our TC calls. However I again will point out that it is often design and implementation work that surfaces requirements, so it is often helpful to be able to point to a proposed design (the solution to problem) to understand the problem itself. That certainly has been my experience in helping generate the proposals for the Resolution spec refactoring, the Namespace refactoring, and XRID refactoring, and the Synonym Element refactoring. It is only by having gone through the process of generating these proposals (and now the additional step of drafting the proposed revisions) that I have come to understand a number requirements which otherwise would have been almost impossible for me to percieve, let alone understand. I will take as much time as I can today and tomorrow to document all these requirements on the corresponding proposal pages. =Drummond -----Original Message----- From: Lindelsee, Mike [mailto:mlindels@visa.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:38 AM To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [xri] Proposed syntax changes In looking over the list of proposed changes (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/Xri2Cd02/SyntaxChanges) to the syntax spec, the only one that doesn't seem to need motivation/requirements/use cases is I1: X.500 Directory Attribute Appendix. This issue seems like something obviously useful and I'm happy to support adding the text to the specification. In the case of all of the other issues though, I feel strongly that we need to be discussing the requirements and agreeing on the need to support them in cd02 before we start talking about proposed solutions. Without the requirements for these changes/additions and agreement that now is the time to address them, I don't see how we can consider including *any* of them in cd02. Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]