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

Hi Ghislain,

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions on the UC document.
Below, we can find some comments:



> b- We might also need to add a matrix table to summarize UCs vs
> challenges/requirements as we had somewhere in the wiki?!
>
> Yes! I think that it is a good idea!


>  c- I've noticed that the keyword "should" is not properly/or even not
> used in the document according to RFC2119.
>

Could you please, tell us in wich parts of the document do you think that
this happen?


>
> Regarding the use cases:
>  1*- Use case #1*
>    In "Propose use of dcat properties dct:accrualPeriodicity and
> dcat:contactpoint", add reference to dcat
>    and links to dcat:accrualPeriodicity and dcat:contactpoint.
>

Ok! We're gonna include this information!


>
>  2-* Use case #6*
>    +Add technical challenges. Summarize the text under "Current Data
> Summary" to make the technical challenges and/or use to complete the story.
>    + Make a link to [ESWC2013] with the reference "Stefan Bischof and Axel
> Polleres. RDFS with attribute equations via SPARQL rewriting. In Proc. Of
> the 10th ESWC, vol. 7882 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), p.
> 335-350, May 2013. Springer".
>

Ok! We're gonna include this information!



> 3- Q. What to do with UCs without challenges nor requires section? See Use
> Cases #3, #4 #10, #20 ? We might see if they can have at least requirements
> and challenges.
>

Yes, they should have at least one requirement.


Thanks again!

Cheers,
Bernadette

>
>
> Cheers,
> Ghislain
>
>


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