Re: Stating requirements

Hi Karen et al,

The first batch of requirements have been edited heavily, the second 50%
less so - was trying to get feedback on progress so far because its a fair
bit of work to try to get the requirements both simple and self
explanatory, and not be lots of repetitions of very similar things.

I have just committed a few edits I had started cleaning up such things.

For the record, the groupings to review are:

6.1 -> 6.4  "Profiles"
6.5 -> 6.9 "Versions"  (add 6.43 here)
6.10 -> 6.13 "Finer grained descriptions of datasets and distributions"

I would like to focus on identification and citation matters as a group -
it kind of overlaps Version perhaps
6.17 6.22 6.23 6.36?

Are spatial and temporal extent part of "fine grained semantics" - in the
same way that classifications schemes used in attributes are part of the
fine grained data structure - is this just an expression of the range of a
property of the data?

Whatever happens, its going to be hard to come up with disjoint categories
and groupings - and I dont want to spend my life justifying my arbitrary
decisions, so I've done a few and lets see whether an agreed structure
falls out looking at the rest please.

Rob

On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 at 12:06 Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:

> I'm sorry I missed the last meeting, so I might be repeating something
> that was already said, but... I think it would be helpful if the
> requirement "headings" were stated as requirements. That way we could
> look at the list of requirements and it would make sense. As an example,
> we have:
>
> ----
> 6.17 Cite datasets
>
> Provide a way to specify information required for data citation (e.g.,
> dataset authors, title, publication year, publisher, persistent identifier)
> ----
>
> I would modify this to be something like:
>
> ----
> 6.17 Provide full citation information for datasets
>
> Currently missing from DCAT are:
>  - full range of identifiers,
>  - dates,
>  - contributors and
>  - resources supported by [DataCite]
> ----
>
> (I copied from the use case - that list of missing may not be correct.
> This is just an example.)
>
> Some requirements are already worded this way, like:
>
> 6.3 Create a way to list the profiles implemented by a dataset or a
> specific distribution
>
> If this makes sense, I may be able to make a number of suggestions
> before the next meeting.
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 <+1%20510-984-3600>
>
>