From: OXVAXD::LOU "Lou Burnard" 17-OCT-1996 18:19:41.75
To: MX%"[log in to unmask]"
CC: LOU
Subj: RE: REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT
>PROPOSITION:
>
>The broadening of the concensus for the Dublin Core has occasioned a
>degree of conceptual drift. The reformulation of a clear set of goals
>will help provide a means for guiding further developments and refinements
>(principles for ruling what is in scope, what is out, and how to proceed).
>
I'm sorry, I thought we'd already agreed this. Of course we have to know what
the ground rules are before we can proceed. I thought we'd already decided that
in Warwick? If people playing hockey stray on to the football
pitch, I suppose someone needs to remind them gently that sticks aren't
>CON: Requirements documents are engineering directives. The refinement
> of Dublin Core description is primarily a pragmatic consensus management
> process that should not be constrained in the same ways.
This seems illogical to me. You can't build a consensus without having some
rules about what the consensus is to be about and how you're going to know when
you've gopt there. That's not engineering. It's common sense!
|