[UCR] Comments on Analyzing Use Cases

Dear colleague,

This email states some general comments on the use cases, which have 
arisen from a first attempt to extract their requirements on the RIF.

I dare to generalize the comments I have on the use cases falling in the 
category REWERSE volunteered for, namely the 'Policy-Based Transaction 
Authorization and Access Control', to all use cases submitted to the WG. 
However, I'll take as examples use cases from this particular category.

1. Level of Detail
The use cases have various levels of abstraction ranging from a very 
detailed level (offered e.g. by the 'Credit Card Transaction 
Authorization ' use case, 
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Credit_Card_Transaction_Authorization) 
where even the needed rules are exemplified, to an abstract one where 
just a sketch of a narrative is given. I think it is a pity that some of 
the use cases have just an abstract level, as it might be the case that 
a more detailed version of them would reveal interesting and important 
requirements on the RIF.

2. Links to Related Work
I find very useful to have in the use case descriptions links to 
published work on theoretical or application related issues (such as 
Benjamin Grosof's links to some of his papers); these might help in  
determining implicit requirements or better understand the use 
cases.This comment could be seen as belonging to point 1... however, I 
think it's better to keep them apart as some of the use cases refer just 
to one of these two points.

I know that every RIF participant has a heavy workload and tries to do 
his/her best in this respect...thus, I think detailing some of the use 
cases gradually by taking the above given comments into account might be 
of help for the RIF WG work.

Best regards from Munich,
Paula