(I'm sorry for people who are trying to follow this project - maybe we
should label such discussions as "internal crap" or something ;-)
Werner,
I'm sorry to pick on you and I don't usually use top-quoting, but to
me the below message is almost impossible to parse and understand.
It mixes at least three different topics, makes vague references to
things that can be interpreted in many different ways ("the
classifier", "current data", "admin console", "MIS implementation"
etc.) and is generally very hard to read and understand for me.
Communicating on our lists is hard, IMO we need to be clearer and way
more concise and specific to avoid wasting each other's time. I tried
to explain that yesterday at [1] - the longer and more complex our
discussion threads, the lower the chances are that we'll understand
each other.
-Bertrand
[1] http://devicemap.markmail.org/thread/j6j2ocpvhiuwwasj
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Werner Keil <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nobody says we should stop or discontinue the classifier. It's an alternate
> (though not W3C compliant) way to access the data file in the current form.
> So for the current data I suggest we should release them in parallel. And
> what you proposed (a bit prematurely) goes along the thread before and
> matches what I said is possible, so on the long run Classifier should
> ideally be more modular (also with regards to e.g. the "admin console") and
> a module may fully implement the W3C API and behave as "drop-in
> replacement" in an app that used another (fully) compliant implementation.
> See http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/DDWG/drafts/api/MIS-DDRSimpleAPI/slide10.jpg
> for
> the MIS implementation
>
>
