W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > June 2010

Re: Comments on UC template

From: Matola, Tod <matolat@oclc.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:06:08 -0400
To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, Emmanuelle Bermes <emmanuelle.bermes@bnf.fr>
CC: public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>, public-lld <public-lld@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C848DE90.EDCA%matolat@oclc.org>
Hello,

 What about 
 - Helping libraries use their data more efficiently or effectively.

Cheers Tod.


On 6/24/10 9:45 AM, "Bernard Vatant" <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> wrote:

> Hello
> 
> A quick note before the meeting
> 
> Regarding use cases, seems to me we could make a distinction between the
> following axes
> 
> - Bringing library legacy to the world = making the heritage available to the
> Semantic Web at large : vocabularies and data migration and publication
> following linked data formats and best practices, specifics of the library
> legacy in this respect etc
> 
> - Using linked data inside the library world = opening and augmenting library
> systems with external content
> 
> - Applications re-using library data outside their original context = end-user
> views, mashups etc
> 
> A distinction orthogonal to the existing / expected dichotomy
> 
> Bernard
> 
> 
> 2010/6/22 Emmanuelle Bermes <emmanuelle.bermes@bnf.fr>
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Some comments and questions regarding the Use Case Template [1].
>> 
>> First a very general comment : it is not really clear to me if we're
>> looking for use cases scenarios (services that we imagine could be
>> created), or use cases that provide a feedback on actual
>> implentations, projects, etc. that are undertaken in libraries. In the
>> charter, it looks like the latter was intended.
>> What I understood from last telecon was that in the Provenance group,
>> the use cases were more theoretical, and were consolidated in a few
>> scenarios.
>> In the SWEO use cases [2], it is rather about describing an existing
>> project/implementation.
>> In the end, I think both ways are interesting, but I would be in favor
>> of a specific section in the template to express if the use-case was
>> implemented, by whom, and what was the outcome †: was it successful,
>> or not, and why.
>> 
>> Small comment on the introduction of the template :
>> "It should not be confused with specifying the technology itself: a
>> use case may allow for many alternatives to achieving user needs."
>> I wonder if really fits our goals : we want use cases that show how
>> Linked data can help libraries achieve their tasks, not generic use
>> cases for library tasks.
>> Here again, I think our focus is different from Provenance XG. For
>> them, Linked Data is the context, and provenance data is the goal. For
>> us, library data is the context, and Linked Data is the goal. Quite
>> the opposite ;-)
>> 
>> Regarding dimensions : related to my previous comments, I think we
>> need to define library dimensions rather than Linked data dimensions.
>> for instance I would suggest dimensions such as :
>> - library catalogues for users :
>> -- bibliographic data
>> -- thesauri, authorities
>> -- collaborative data (reviews, comments, tags)
>> - library data exchanges (between libraries, B2B)
>> - management data
>> -- user logs or usage data
>> -- loan information
>> -- administrative & preservation metadata
>> -etc.
>> These are just a few ideas as a starting point.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Emmanuelle
>> 
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UCTemplate1
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/public/UseCases/
>> 
> 
> 


Cheers Tod
-- 
≥Systems, scientific and philosophic, come and go. Each method of limited
understanding is at length exhausted. In its prime each system is a
triumphant success: in its decay it is an obstructive nuisance.≤ -- Alfred
North Whitehead
Received on Thursday, 24 June 2010 14:06:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 24 June 2010 14:06:48 GMT