W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Gap analysis

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 13:34:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4D2EF15A.2080901@few.vu.nl>
To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
CC: "ZENG, MARCIA" <mzeng@kent.edu>, "public-xg-lld@w3.org" <public-xg-lld@w3.org>, "Panzer,Michael" <panzerm@oclc.org>
Hi Karen, Marcia, Michael (and everyone else!)

I've tried to re-structure our 'Temporary Questions and Notes (from use cases)' re-using (and adapting) Karen's categories:
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Cluster_VocAlign&oldid=2627#Problems_and_limitations

The result is perhaps too detailed, as I want for now to keep the matter for the issues. But generally I found it a very useful exercise.

Cheers,

Antoine


> Yes, Marcia, I think that your list of "temporary questions" is mostly what I am thinking of as a gap analysis. I would like to suggest that each cluster include a gap analysis derived from the use cases, and that in the end we should bring these together as part of our final report.
>
> kc
>
> Quoting "ZENG, MARCIA" <mzeng@kent.edu>:
>
>> Karen,
>> We have a 'Temporary Questions and Notes (from use cases)' section temporarily sitting there in the VocAlign cluster wiki page. [1] I think there are similar types of gaps with what you have listed. Do you think those can be useful points? We have not summarized/organized them yet.
>> Marcia
>>
>> [1] 8. Temporary Questions and Notes (from use cases)
>> in: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Cluster_VocAlign
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/6/11 1:57 PM, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>
>> This is a (hasty?) gap analysis from the Archives Cluster:
>>
>> Missing Vocabularies
>> - sometimes specific (physical state of original in a preservation
>> context), sometimes general (need vocabularies for preservation data),
>> but no vocabulary for the function or data elements
>>
>> Data incompatibilities or lacks
>> - current data is free text, but contains quantitative information
>> that needs to be pulled out
>> - data needs to be qualified as "estimated" or "derived" so users know
>> it is not precise (this is possibly a vocabulary issue)
>> - current practice does not include rich relationships, just
>> "related," so there is no source of relationships
>>
>> Community guidance
>> - no examples in our community domain that we can follow
>> - lack of information on how to create a data model
>> - no community guidance on which technologies and vocabularies to use
>>
>> Technology questions
>> - is linked data scalable to the size we need?
>> - is linked data appropriate for highly hierarchical data models?
>>
>> Technology availability
>> - no systems available on market for linked data creation and use
>> - open source solutions available are in an unfinished state
>>
>>
>> kc
>> --
>> Karen Coyle
>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:33:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:33:18 GMT