W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > February 2014

Re: Library Linked Data use cases

From: Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:49:50 -0500
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: public-dwbp-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF3274F055.0B7146DA-ON85257C8D.0056C093-85257C8D.0056F60F@us.ibm.com>
Antoine,

I like the idea of a common use case template and the identification of 
use case curators.  But I also like the specific questions I contributed 
(that others can add to or change) to tease out relevant issues for our 
WG.  How would you recommend we integrate the questions into the use case 
template.

And are there any volunteers to be use case curators?


Best Regards,

Steve

Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again"



From:
Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
To:
<public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Date:
02/28/2014 10:01 AM
Subject:
Library Linked Data use cases



Hi,

As promised during the call today, here are some pointers about what we 
did for the Library Linked Data W3C incubator group [1].
There, we also wanted to use concrete cases as a scoping mechanism, to 
ground our future work.
The template we use was at
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Template
And the process is documented at
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_case_process_details


Some remarks that could be useful for DWBP:

- for gathering cases, we chose not to focus too much 'use cases', 
'stories' or whatever. Actually we had started asking for use cases, but 
found that many people were just comfortable sending more concrete 
'stories'.
So we just decided to let people send what they could, as long as it fit 
the template, which could accommodate various levels of abstraction. We 
saw it rather *our* job to abstract what we received, into use cases like 
the ones in the final report [2]

- we nominated some group members acted as 'curators' for the received 
cases, editing and finding out the details when needed. Sometimes it was 
indeed required to go back to the case providers -- many were group 
members anyway, so it wasn't hard ;-)

- we had put together some guidelines to make sure it wouldn't be too hard 
to put all cases together in the end.
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UCCuration

- similar to the current DWBP detailed set of questions [3], we also had 
come with a set of topics that were specifically dear to the group:
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Topics
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Dimensions
But we refrained from having these impacting too much the case gathering 
process. They were made available to case contributors, but as a 
suggestion merely linked from the template. In the end, these detailed 
lists were perhaps more for us as case curators than for the case 
contributors!
As a matter of fact, putting together the detailed list worked a bit like 
a 'purge'. Everyone put their smart ideas there, and after that these 
ideas didn't influence as much the scoping of the group as much as if we 
had been discussing them every week for 30 minutes...


I am very much aware that it was a group of library-aware people, not 
fearing apparent complexity ;-) But our process was in fact much inspired 
by what had been done in other groups, like the Semantic Web Deployment or 
Provenance ones, so I believe it could inspire the DWBP group as well.

Cheers,

Antoine


[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/XGR-lld-usecase/
[3] 
https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/index.php?title=Use_Cases&oldid=365#Common_Questions_to_Consider_for_Each_Story
Received on Friday, 28 February 2014 15:50:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:24:06 UTC