RE: [W3C LDP WG] Review of the "Linked Data Platform Use Cases and Requirements" document...

Hi guys,

 

Find attached the documents related to the review of the UCRD.

 

Cheers,

 

                Miguel

 


Descripción: Logo_OEG

Miguel Esteban Gutiérrez

Ontology Engineering Group

Facultad de Informática - Universidad Politécnica de Madrid


C/ Ciruelos, 2, Boadilla del Monte,

28660 - Madrid - ESPAÑA

Phone:

+34 91 336 36 70


Fax:

+34 91 352 48 19

 

 

De: Miguel Esteban Gutiérrez [mailto:mesteban@fi.upm.es] 
Enviado el: miércoles, 12 de junio de 2013 12:07
Para: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Asunto: [W3C LDP WG] Review of the "Linked Data Platform Use Cases and
Requirements" document...

 

Hi all,

 

I’ve finally completed the review for the “Linked Data Platform Use Cases
and Requirements” document.

The full review report should now be on Steve’s inbox :-D, and I just wanted
to share with you the main conclusions.

 

The review addresses first and foremost the style, cohesion, and consistency
of the document. Secondly, the 

comments tackle the validity of the contents in the context of the scope of
the document and the LDP initiative as a whole.

 

The document can be improved in many ways. First, it is necessary to
standardize the way in which recurring sections 

are written (i.e., the of user stories), and how the examples are presented.
It is also necessary to properly identify user 

stories, use cases, scenarios, and requirements to improve the overall
traceability (and that includes adding the 

perceptive traceability matrixes to the document). Finally, the examples
should include not just valid RDF 

representations but real meaningful data so that the value of the scenario
is augmented by showing how 

it applies to a real world set up.

 

With regards to the relationship to the last current Linked Data Platform
draft (March 7th, 2013), it is worth 

mentioning that not all the requirements of the UCRD are covered by the LDP
specification and not all the 

functionalities of the LDP specification have their basis on requirements
from the UCRD. For example, the UCRD 

defines requirements for binary attachment support not covered by the LDP
specification. On the contrary, a 

relevant–yet optional– functionality of the LDP specification such as
container pagination support is not sufficiently 

motivated in the UCRD.

 

After deeply reading both documents I strongly believe that it is necessary
to improve the traceability of the 

functionalities of the LDP specification to the requirements (and scenarios,
use cases, and user stories) of the 

UCRD, as it will serve us to focus the LDP specification on the requirements
identified and approved by the group 

and not the likes and dislikes of individuals.

 

Cheers,

 

                Miguel

 


Descripción: Logo_OEG

Miguel Esteban Gutiérrez

Ontology Engineering Group

Facultad de Informática - Universidad Politécnica de Madrid


C/ Ciruelos, 2, Boadilla del Monte,

28660 - Madrid - ESPAÑA

Phone:

+34 91 336 36 70


Fax:

+34 91 352 48 19