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

Re: Use Case Types

From: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 09:57:16 -0300
Message-ID: <CANx1Pzy1T+n0mbUTTVaFD3a6L69AvbxjxSio=-rOewDhfpV0gg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
Cc: DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hello Laufer,

Thanks for you message!

I really like your point of view and I agree with you when you say that we
have two types of Use Case. In my opinion, they are similar to the two
types of use case presented in the Use Cases and Lessons for the Data Cube
Vocabulary [1]: Publisher Use Case and Consumer Use. However, if we divide
the cycle of publishing data on the Web in more than two steps (publishing
and consuming), as proposed in [2], then maybe we will have more than two
types of Use Case.

Our initial idea with the Use Cases Document was to extract some standard
Use Cases from the set of stories and use cases that will be gathered.
Then, for each type of use case, we could define the main general
challenges and maybe some best practices. However, for doing this we should
have a larger number of stories and use cases.

I also agree that the audience of the DWBP should be the publishers and
that we should listen the developers (consumers) to better understand what
they expect from the published data.

Concerning DBpedia, I think that this is a great example of publishing data
on the Web and that it could be interesting to have a use case like this.

Best regards,
Bernadette

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube-use-cases/
[2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_on_the_Web_Best_Practices

I noticed a discussion about the documents to be prepared in the London F2F
> Meeting and, in particular, the Use Cases document, where there is a
> preliminary list of Use Cases. At the same time, in some discussions in the
> list some examples of initiatives are cited as, for example, BetaNYC and
> the LA Control Panel.
>
>
>
> I believe Use Cases are to be used as a way to gather requirements that
> will be addressed by the Best Practices. I can see two types of Use Case.
> The Use Cases listed in the DWBP document are those aimed at the publishers
> and the Use Cases cited in the list are Use Cases aimed at the developers.
>
>
>
> In a post by Steve, he cited one example of BetaNYC that is interesting
> because we can see the crossing of these two kinds of Use Cases, when a
> developer says that he uses data from DBPedia. Here, in my understanding,
> we can see how to apply the DWBP's mission statements:
>
>    - to develop the open data ecosystem, facilitating better
>    communication between developers and publishers;
>    - to provide guidance to publishers that will improve consistency in
>    the way data is managed, thus promoting the re-use of data;
>    - to foster trust in the data among developers, whatever technology
>    they choose to use, increasing the potential for genuine innovation.
>
>
>
> As I understand, the audience of DWBP should be the publishers such that
> by following the best practices recommended by DWBP these publishers will
> likely enhance the quality of the data being published as well as provide
> communication artifacts that could facilitate the developers to build
> applications that use that data.
>
>
>
> It would be interesting if we could have some interviews or ask some of
> the developers to build scenarios where they could point some practices
> that could facilitate their work.
>
>
>
> I see DBPedia as a good example of a set of communication artifacts
> between the publisher and the developers. Maybe DBPedia could be included
> as one of the Use Cases.
>
>
>
> Well, this is a dump of my thoughts. Let me know if these things make
> sense as a way to align my understanding of the group.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Laufer
>
>
> --
> .  .  .  .. .  .
> .        .   . ..
> .     ..       .
>



-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 14 March 2014 12:58:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:24:12 UTC