W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > November 2008

Re: use cases and how to contribute -- Re: Semantic MyPage Use Case

From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:29:35 +0100
To: "Jose M. Alonso" <josema@w3.org>
Cc: eGov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, Steinar Skagemo <sskagemo@gmail.com>, Kjetil Helberg <kjetil@helberg.no>, John Sheridan <John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk>, Kevin Novak <kevinnovak@aia.org>
Message-Id: <200811121029.36174.Kjetil.Kjernsmo@computas.com>

On Tuesday 11 November 2008 18:16:30 Jose M. Alonso wrote:
> Hi Kjetil, Steinar and Kjetil (again :)
> Thanks very much for contributing this one. I've only skim read it but
> looks very interesting.
> This made me think of a current limitation we have. We can only
> acknowledge contributions of people in the Group and I beliee we
> should change this to be more flexible. Here's an idea.
> Are you familiar with SWEO?
>    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/

Yup, I was a member of the group. :-)

> See the use cases they've been compiling at:
>    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/public/UseCases/
> We could use a two step process. Wiki for drafting use cases and
> compilation of ideas, etc. then publish them at eg.
> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/public/UseCases/
> This would let us ack people properly and people to retain copyright
> of the submitted use case as needed, granting a free use license, so
> to say.
> If we do it this way, it'll be an constantly updated compilation of
> use cases rather than a few published in a Note. We might want to
> rethink what to put in the Note though.

I've been thinking about a two-stage process all along, but this has perhaps 
not been articulated. 

I think the SWEO Use Cases are quite different from ours. The SWEO Use Cases 
and Case Studies were more of a showcase for Semantic Web, to show people 
what Semantic Web technologies are actually used for, whereas I think of our 
Use Cases as more of a guideline for further work within the group. This is 
more aligned with the work done in POWDER and EXI and predecessors. 

The idea with these Use Cases documents is that the scope of the group should 
be limited by actual usage needs, and also that the deliverables should make 
sure that the projected needs can be met.

I've been thinking that this is the model we should follow. So, what I would 
have in mind is a relatively open submission process with wiki-style editing. 
The IG should chop the use cases up in pieces and distill it into a few use 
cases that several members of the group can agree on. For example, Steinar 
has allready told me that there is considerable overlap with his Use Case and 
Use Case 10.

I think we should publish a Note, since this Note should be a guiding and 
scoping document for further work, but it does not need to be an aggregation 
of the submitted Use Cases. To the contrary, the Use Cases published in the 
Note should contain descriptions of problems that IG members are willing to 
address or have partners that will address. The more members willing to work 
on a problem, the better. If no members are willing to work on a Use Case, it 
should not go into the Note, but may of course be in the Use Cases Wiki.

This also implies that some distillation is needed, that Use Cases admitted to 
the note are issues where IG members find common ground, unless one member is 
deeply committed to something that other members also find interesting but is 
not assigning resources to.

I think that IP rights to to finished Note will not be so much of an issue, 
since they will differ considerably from the original submissions. We may 
still credit the original submittors, like "Based on a submission by Foo 
Agency and Bar Inc."

So, I feel the Wiki period is a brainstorm period, but that the group should 
distill this quite soon into a Note, which will "set in stone" the issues 
that the group should work to solve in the rest of the work. 

I'm really sorry that I didn't make it to the face-to-face meeting, since I'm 
sure many ideas were articulated there.

Kind regards 

Kjetil Kjernsmo
Senior Knowledge Engineer
Mobile: +47 986 48 234
Email: kjetil.kjernsmo@computas.com   
Web: http://www.computas.com/


Computas AS  PO Box 482, N-1327 Lysaker | Phone:+47 6783 1000 | Fax:+47 6783 
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 09:38:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:39 UTC