[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Call for vote on new deliverable structure
*Mary > > My vote is "yes" on having two deliverables, but I feel a little uneasy > > about the titles of the two. > > > > "Published Subjects : General Requirements and Recommendations" > > "Published Subject Documentation : Requirements and Recommendation" > > These are a little confusing for people outside of our committee, I think. *Thomas > As well as inside Agreed. *Mary > > Published Subjects Requirements and Recommendations > > Part I: General Description and Core Components > > > > Published Subjects Requirements and Recommendations > > Part 2: Documentation Structures I would be happy with that, except I don't figure exactly what you mean by "core components". And then I suppose you would like having something like Published Subjects Requirements and Recommendations Part 3: Management, Updating and Versioning Published Subjects Requirements and Recommendations Part 4: Use Cases and Best Practices *Thomas > Why shouldn't we start with the "PSI primer" (with exactly the content > Bernard has proposed). > > W3C did it for XML Schema Language http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/ > "XML Schema Part 0: Primer is a non-normative document intended to provide > an easily readable description of the XML Schema facilities, and is oriented > towards quickly understanding how to create schemas using the XML Schema > language." Well. I don't think Part 1 as *only* a Primer. If we put some Requirements in it - even very minimal ones - those are normative. Bernard PS: It figures ... we are discussing something while it is voted. What a process ... we should ask for chair's resignation :))
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC