proposed UCR outline

[mostly for UCR editors]

UCR is getting rather disorganized.   It's kind of unreadable.

Here's a proposal for how to organize it, motivated in part by a
discussion with David yesterday, after the meeting ended.  If people
like this organization, we can start to figure out how to get the text
to look like this.  (I think this is all editorial stuff that doesn't
need Working Group approval, except that the WG needs to actually be
able to read & understand the content it approved in the meeting.)

   -- Sandro

================================================================
  

1.  Introduction

      ?    what are rules?   why standardize?   some history?

2.  Use Cases

      for each use case:

        title
        text
        links to requirements, maybe CSFs
        (later: links to test cases)
        (maybe: links to more detailed versions on the wiki for people
        really trying to solve a problem like this)

3.  Requirements
   
     define our terms ("covers", ...)

     for each requirement:  (in alphabetic order by title)

        short title (no more than 40 characters - used for links)
        statement (1 paragraph)
        links to use cases and CSFs which motivate this requirement
        additional comments
        either: approved for phase 1 // under consideration for phase 2
            (maybe "under consideration" items don't appear in WD?)
            (maybe group by this flag, and then alphabetize within groups)

4.  Goal Analysis

       description of Critical Success Factors process / terminology

       diagram -- maybe a imagemap with links to appropriate
                  descriptions (maybe even as pop-up on mouse-over if
                  someone feels motivated)

       for each goal
             short title
             statement 
             link to CSFs (implicit in outline form)

       for each CSF
             short title
             statement
             link to goals (implicit in outline-form)
             link to requirements, and maybe CSF's
	
5.  Coverage (RIFRAF)

       for each discriminator:
              short title
              explanation, including alternative vocabulary
	      flag: in phase 1, unresolved whether in phase 1, not in phase 1
              maybe some kind of grouping/clustering/hierarchy
                 (as in current draft)
              
       later (WD3?) - for each rule system/rule language, and for 
       each dialect, how does it match up to the discriminators?
       (this would be a large table, or perhaps a set of tables, with
       one per dialect).

Received on Saturday, 10 June 2006 14:04:18 UTC