Jim Stuttard a écrit :
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:02:36 +0200, Ludovic Dubost <[email protected]> wrote:
So the 5% errors is not that bad.. With network tools I think we can improve the model. The good thing about programming in XWiki is that you can have much more easily experienced people review what end-users have done. People that have the content knowledge can more easily share the work with people that are the programmers. They can work together in the same tool.. This is not the case of the more classical approach of separating application design from application usage.
Can't have 5% errors in exam result data. You wouldn't implement a spreadsheet without testing it.
In this case, I would say you have to have your application be reviewed.. I don't think it's an issue with the tool, but an issue with the process. It's not because a tool gives the possibility to users to modify that it should be used in all cases !
Yes.. I've been relunctant to build a roadmap because there wasn't the actual critical mass to implement it.. I tend to view a roadmap something on whcih we would commit.. Now we could do some sort of tentative roadmap without dates showing our priorities..
That would be great, I'm sure everyone would really appreciate your architectural vision without obligation :-).
Ok.. I'll look into this.. Ludovic