Re: Actions for all of us — from today's call

Hi Steve,

Thanks for your comments and suggestions! Below, you can find my comments:

> 1.  Could we include more metadata about the use cases themselves, such
as:
>
>         - Country
>         - City
>         - URL

Yes! When it applies, we can include.

 > 2.  Do we need to list which team member contributed the use cases?

I saw other Use Case documents that show this information [1]. Do you think
this can be a problem?

> 3.  By "Data Usage", do we mean how the data is used by the publishing
authority or how often it is used by data consumers?  Is the data refresh
rate included in "Data Usage"?

I think that Data Usage concerns both views (data publisher and data
consumer). In my point of view, data refresh rate concerns Data Versioning
instead of Data Usage. We can add a brief description for each challenge
and then it will be more clear.

> 4.  Many use cases have redundant challenges and requirements.  Would it
be possible to color code the redundancies and highlight the unique ones so
as to make it easier for readers to pull out "what's new" and important in
each use case?

I'm not sure if I understand your suggestion :) Could you show me an
example?

> 5.  Someday, a table summarizing all the requirements would be wonderful.

Yes, we can do this! I suggest to create a table summarizing Use Cases,
Requirements and Challenges as proposed by Ghislain.

Cheers,
Bernadette

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/NOTE-skos-ucr-20090818/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-csvw-ucr-20140327/






>
>
>
>  From: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br> To: Christophe Guéret <
> christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl> Cc: Hadley Beeman <hadley@linkedgov.org>,
> deirdre.lee@insight-centre.org, Laufer <laufer@globo.com>, DWBP Public
> List <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org> Date: 05/28/2014 01:25 PM Subject: Re:
> Actions for all of us — from today's call
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hello Christophe,
>
> Thank you very much for your comments! Yesterday, I made a pull request of
> a new version of the document with some updates on Section 4. You can find
> the updated version here [1].  Please, if possible, take a look to see if
> this new version is better.
>
> I also agree with you that we should get ride of all the "???" of Section
> 5. In some cases, we identified the requirements, but we still don't have
> any use case to make the link. If we don't have a link, then I suggest to
> remove the requirement.
>
> Cheers,
> Bernadette
>
> [1] *https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/blob/master/usecasesv1.html*
> <https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/blob/master/usecasesv1.html>
>
>
> 2014-05-28 11:17 GMT-03:00 Christophe Guéret <
> *christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl* <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>>:
> Hi Hadley, Deirdre, Bernadette, Laufer,
>
> To report on action A., I just add a look at the use-cases 14 and 17, and
> also the rest of the document. The use-cases are fine but in the rest of
> the document I found this section to be rather vague :
> *4. General Challenges*
>
> Extracted from all use-cases...
>
>    - Metadata
>    - Granularity
>    - Data Formats
>    - Data Vocabularies
>    - Data selection
>    - Data access
>    - Sensitive Data
>    - Data Usage
>    - Identification
>    - Industry-reuse
>    - Provenance
>    - Licenses
>    -
>    Maybe we could add a one-liner summary next to the bullet points and
>    also link these to the points found in section 5 ?
>
>    Speaking about Section 5, I found that one to be too imprecise :
>    R-PersArchiving
>    *It should be possible to archive data*
>
>    *Motivation:* *DigitalArchivingofLinkedData*
>    <http://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/blob/master/usecasesv1.html#UC-DigitalArchivingofLinkedData>
>
>    I know that to this point we don't have much clue about what should be
>    precisely done there, we even still have to define the scope, but phrased
>    as such I'm not sure this point brings anything to the use-cases. It sounds
>    to me like having another requirement that reads "it should be possible to
>    use data" would be as informative/useful - and we don't have that one. We
>    can also wonder whether the metadata should be archived(able) too.
>
>    I also don't see how we can have some requirement with "*Motivation:*
>    ??" when we agreed (if I remember correctly) that all the requirement would
>    be derived from our use-cases. We should get rid of all the "??" and ground
>    all the parts of Section 5 to some of the use-cases from Section 3 (and/or
>    the challenges derived from this section)
>
>    Action B is done ;-)
>
>    Action C : the document looks fine to me but AFAIK archivists define a
>    lot more type of meta-data, though I could not find any list to share. I'll
>    get back on that with people that can provide this list and add a link in
>    the wiki page.
>
>    Cheers,
>    Christophe
>
>
>    On 23 May 2014 16:12, Hadley Beeman <*hadley@linkedgov.org*
>    <hadley@linkedgov.org>> wrote:
>    Hi all,
>
>    We had a very productive meeting today — minutes to follow — but for
>    simplicity, I've put our group actions together here.
>
>    This week, in addition to your own actions, it would be great if you
>    could:
>
>    A.  Review the Use Case draft and be ready to vote on transitioning it
>    to first public working draft (FPWD) in next week's call. [1]
>
>    Deirdre and Bernadette are still working on polishing it and adding
>    bits like the abstract, so be aware that it's not completely final.  But
>    the content should be stable enough for you to know if you're happy to
>    publish it or to comment via the mailing list.
>
>    (It's probably worth reminding you that FPWD is just a signal to the
>    community to begin looking at the document.  It does not have to be final
>    or perfect at this stage. [2] )
>
>    B.  Tell the vocabulary editors when you can join a call for the
>    vocabs, via this Doodle poll.  (If you're interested in the vocabs.)  This
>    will be a weekly call, covering both vocabularies. [3]
>
>    C.  Review the Guidance on the Provision of Metadata page for the Best
>    Practices document.  Laufer would like you to comment on it, criticise it
>    or improve it (either on the mailing list or in the wiki itself). [4]
>
>    D.  Comment on the email thread on data preservation.  Christophe and
>    Phil are looking for input. [5]
>
>    Thanks a lot for a good week!  Looking forward to speaking soon.
>
>    Cheers,
>
>       Hadley
>
>    [1]
>    *http://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/blob/master/usecasesv1.html*
>    <http://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/blob/master/usecasesv1.html>
>    [2]  *http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr#first-wd*
>    <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr#first-wd>
>    [3]  *http://doodle.com/tpp2p8fvpmchx4s4*
>    <http://doodle.com/tpp2p8fvpmchx4s4>
>    [4]
>    *https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Guidance_on_the_Provision_of_Metadata*
>    <https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Guidance_on_the_Provision_of_Metadata>
>    [5]
>    *http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2014May/0080.html*
>    <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2014May/0080.html>
>
>
>
>    --
>    Onderzoeker
> *+31(0)6 14576494* <%2B31%280%296%2014576494>
> *christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl* <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>
>
>    *Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)*
>    DANS bevordert duurzame toegang tot digitale onderzoeksgegevens. Kijk
>    op *www.dans.knaw.nl* <http://www.dans.knaw.nl/> voor meer informatie.
>    DANS is een instituut van KNAW en NWO.
>
>    Let op, per 1 januari hebben we een nieuw adres:
>    DANS | Anna van Saksenlaan 51 | 2593 HW Den Haag | Postbus 93067 |
>    2509 AB Den Haag | *+31 70 349 44 50* <%2B31%2070%20349%2044%2050> |
>    *info@dans.knaw.nl* <info@dans.kn> | www.dans.knaw.nl
>
>    *Let's build a World Wide Semantic Web!*
> *http://worldwidesemanticweb.org/* <http://worldwidesemanticweb.org/>
>
> * e-Humanities Group (KNAW)*
>  <http://www.ehumanities.nl/>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> Centro de Informática
> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>


-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------