Where is the SVGWG evidence or methodology for the SVG1.0, 1.1 and 1.2
specifications?
regards
Jonathan Chetwynd
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.openicon.org/
+44 (0) 20 7978 1764
I am being asked to present a variety of evidence to support request
for changes for example
from Doug's recent posting
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Jul/0186.html
You may be right, but it's hard to tell without more data. Can you
please outline some concrete use cases and requirements, preferably
citing existing practice, so we can work on the technical aspects of
just what would need to happen to satisfy those use cases?
Since you are serving as the advocate for what you term "naive users",
and want to get them more involved in setting standards, I suggest
that you engage them directly in finding what they do today, what they
want to be able to do, and what they feel is blocking them from doing
it. It's probably not reasonable to push them on technical details, so
anecdotal examples from their perspective is probably enough for us to
drill into technical solutions. Please indicate where the use cases
are identified by your constituents, and where you have made
inferences and conclusions based on your observation.
There's no need to be overly formal in your report (though that may be
useful for you to reuse it for your own purposes), but thoroughness
will help us to produce the best solution.
Thanks for identifying a possible use case and bringing it to our
attention. If we find that the data merits it, this could form part
of the basis for a module. It may be that we find the use cases can
be adequately solved with other means or other technologies, so your
input won't be wasted even if the SVG WG doesn't end up specifying
anything, since hopefully you will have gotten some solution.
