Dave Pawson wrote:
> 2008/6/23 <>:
>
>> I don't disagree on the use and applicability of use cases. My concern is
>> in having it in the charter. I'd prefer to have use cases as a TC
>> deliverable.
>
>
> 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.
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?
--
Sander Marechal
