- From: András Micsik <micsik@sztaki.hu>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:26:07 +0200
- CC: public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Dear All, We could use the information consumption lifecycle (collect->interpret->analyze->synthesize->present->publish) as a lead to get a hierarchical list of user needs. It is quite similar to Karen's behaviours image. I tried to sort some of the existing terms: collect: - browse / explore / find / retrieve entities - to select an entity appropriate to the user’s needs - to acquire or obtain access to the entity interpret / analyze / synthesize: - to convert entities to another format - to merge selected entities with local data - to reason about selected entities - to enrich existing entities with more data - to identify an entity - to contextualise the entities by connecting them with other entities present / publish: - to create or update entities - to annotate, comment information - to visualize entities and their relations - Justify, to document the authority data creator’s reason - to make new entities accessible inside an information system - to provide new data as LOD Furthermore, I'd add "Knowledge bases" under "Non library information systems" Social uses could be a yes/no property, it's quite hard to classify all possible goals of social functionality. Andras Antoine Isaac írta: > Hi Karen, > > That's an interesting view indeed. But maybe it's better to keep it for > us for a later fine-grained analysis of the cases we got, and not for > external use case providers. As you say it, this is really complex and I > think it could prove deterring. > > What would be interesting is to test the current classification at [1] > against yours, to see if we should add another general category there. > To me: > - "discover" overlaps with "Browse / explore / select", "Access / > obtain" and "Retrieve / find" > - "gather" overlaps with "Integrate / contextualize" and "Justify" > - "create" overlaps with "Add information / annotate / comment" > > That leaves with "share" which is not obviously present in the current > state. We could add it, maybe also adding the "cite" suggested by Monica > [2] > though she linked it to "annotate / comment" in her mail. > > Cheers, > > Antoine > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Dimensions > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2010Jul/0030.html >
Received on Thursday, 29 July 2010 09:26:51 UTC