citation issues was: process, [citation] (was Re: [uf-new] announcing the hOCR and hBIB microformats)

[Tom]

I
On Apr 8, 2007, at 7:20 PM, Benjamin West wrote:

> On 4/8/07, Tom <tmbdev at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for the response
>>
>> > Instead, I'm re-organizing them as issues,
>>
>> I don't understand.  Are you asserting that my requirements are
>> "issues" in the standard software engineering sense (http://
>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issue_%28computers%29 and http://
>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requirement, or are you simply using different
>> terminology?
>>
>
> Requirements emerge from iterating over the process we've  
> outlined.  Top down
> assertions can be integrated into the process by being treated as  
> issues, as
> they are in other standards processes.  My usage of issues is  
> related to the
> TAG findings: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html .
>
>> I think at this point you have to support your assertion that the
>> "strawman" citation microformat on the Wiki satisfies my
>> requirements; alternatively, you can argue that my requirement is
>> either unfulfillable or not important, or that you just don't want to
>> debate the issue and I should go away (in which case, we'll simply
>> continue independently or push for DC adoption).
>>
>
> Microformats standards follow the process (
> http://www.microformats.org/wiki/process ).  All of the actions you  
> suggest
> are subject to that process.  The best way to do that is to phrase  
> them as
> questions that can be answered by applying them to real world  
> examples.  I
> look forward to continued feedback from interested parties,  
> including you.
>
> I hope that clears things up a bit.
>
> -Ben
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-new mailing list
> microformats-new at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new