• From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
• To: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>,Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:53:17 -0400

At 01:16 PM 7/19/2001 -0400, John Cowan wrote:

>How not?  After all, there is no actual draft Blueberry spec yet.
>We are at the very *beginning* of the process.  There will be
>at least one more draft of the requirements;

While others have addressed any "proposal" or substantive issues in these 
areas, there have been times where the discussion has given me pause with 
comments of the sort "we don't intend to..." or "that would be too big...", 
etc.

If the group is truly in the requirements gathering phase, it would follow 
that all requirements be gathered and reviewed, without any gate-keeping 
function that is making subjective judgements on whether something is or is 
not appropriate, except for exceptionally extreme cases.


Ann



Ann Navarro, WebGeek Inc.
http://www.webgeek.com/
Now in print! Effective Web Design, 2nd Edition
http://www.webgeek.com/books/
What's on my mind? http://www.snorf.net/blog/	

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Closing Blueberry
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: Closing Blueberry
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Next by Date: Re: Closing Blueberry
• Previous by thread: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Next by thread: Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread