Re: two initial use cases on wiki

Thanks Markus. I'll try to encourage the use cases to get written up.

I suggest for the stakeholder list:

PUBLISHERS-STEM to become PUBLISHERS-SCHOL and to add USERS-SCHOL.
Unless there's a specific requirement for STEM rather than general
academic/scholarly/technical publications?

Rob




On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Markus Gylling
<markus.gylling@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>>  My assumption is
>> that we are looking for the broadest cases first, rather than
>> specifics ... but the current use cases are quite specific too.
>
> My take on this is to not worry too much about general vs niche at this stage. If you have a use case that has relevance for you as a stakeholder, then add it! While too much niche-ism obviously will not be good in the end, the idea is that the IG use case acceptance process (e.g. taking the status from NEW to ACCEPTED or REJECTED) as well as the forthcoming prioritization exercise, would catch and filter out or at least demote entries that are found to matter to too few.
>
> As you know Rob, it is advisable generally to be as specific as one can about the actor(s) from the onset, to help us later on. E.g. using PUBLISHER-SCHOLARLY, or something like that, for the case you mention.
>
>> * Are annotations that are considered part of the publication in scope
>> or not?
>
> In scope.
>
> hth, /markus
>
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 9:23 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> A couple of questions came up on the Open Annotation list about the
>> use case scope:
>>
>> * The scope of the publication itself is reasonably well defined by
>> the charter, but the use cases need to take into account the actors.
>> There are many scholarly annotation activities on regular digital
>> publications that would not be necessarily important for the wider
>> public.  Should we take these into account or not?  My assumption is
>> that we are looking for the broadest cases first, rather than
>> specifics ... but the current use cases are quite specific too.
>>
>> * Are annotations that are considered part of the publication in scope
>> or not?  For example, the author may annotate their own work in a kind
>> of DVD Extras way.  My assumption here is that these are in scope, but
>> again guidance would be appreciated.
>>
>> Many thanks,
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:23 AM, Markus Gylling
>> <markus.gylling@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On last weeks call, we agreed to exercise the proposed scheme for the use case gathering at the wiki with some complete examples.
>>>
>>> I have now added two such entries (NakaTobira 01 and Transclusion 01) to the wiki, both available from the directory page at http://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/UseCase_Directory.
>>>
>>> For further discussion on todays call.
>>>
>>> /markus
>
>

Received on Thursday, 22 August 2013 20:22:24 UTC