Re: New feature negotiation syntax
Koen Holtman (koen@win.tue.nl)
Fri, 6 Jun 1997 14:16:16 +0200 (MET DST)
Larry Masinter:
>
>>A good requirements document states the problem and a set of tests that
>>would verify that the problem has been solved. I think Ted Hardie made
>>a start on those two items, whereas I don't think Koen's statement does
>>either.
>
>Yes. The universal reaction I get when I ask people why they
>think we're not making progress on TCN is that there isn't
>agreement on the requirements.
You have obviously been talking to different people than I have. Care
to name some of them? Most people I have been talking to judge TCN by
its ability to solve some known problems. Requirements documents
don't come into it.
Re-reading this thread, I see that most of us think that some sort of
applicability statement would be nice, but I don't see a big call for
a full-blown requirements document.
>Since Ted has made a good start, I'm hoping he'll volunteer to
>shepherd the requirements document through the process. Otherwise,
>we'll need someone else to try to manage the document through
>the consensus process.
I might volunteer for such an activity once I understand what people
actually want the requirements document to do. Right now, I don't
even understand what you want it to do.
>Larry
Koen.