- From: Emmanuelle Bermes <emmanuelle.bermes@bnf.fr>
- Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 09:29:49 +0200
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: "Haffner, Alexander" <A.Haffner@d-nb.de>, public-xg-lld@w3.org
- Message-ID: <AANLkTimkopSLOtU8hgNiFqrz726WW0A5GPFaLd5fwMc0@mail.gmail.com>
> > So, to sum up: we try to do it in the group in a later curation/analysis > step, we do not request everyone else outside to do it. > Do you think we could get consensus on that? > +1 : the use cases will need curation afterwards anyway. Emmanuelle > > Cheers, > > Antoine > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Use_Case_Open_Library_Data&oldid=565 > [2] http://id.loc.gov/authorities/about.html > [3] In fact given the time it took us to realize, I imagine that a template > that tries to ensure appropriate actor-level goal may become very long and > contribute to make the use case filling task (even more) tedious. > > > Thank you Alex for clarifying the context. >> >> I'd like to bring this up again before our next call, because we need to >> reach an agreement on the use case template now. >> The discussion page at [1] is currently empty. So we will probably need >> to discuss the template again on next call. >> Maybe we can have a discussion on each part of the template and decide >> if we keep it / drop it / edit it. >> >> Following the discussions we already had, we could start with the >> following : >> >> Name -> no problem, keep >> >> Owner -> no problem, keep >> >> Background and Current Practice -> no problem, keep >> >> Goal -> to be edited to make it clear that it's meant to be the goal of >> the actor in the scenario, not the goal of the use case >> >> Use Case Scenario -> no problem, keep >> >> Target Audience -> added by Joachim. The group finds it useful but it >> should be optional. To be edited : we need to add guidelines on how to >> fill it. >> >> Application of linked data for the given use case -> not discussed yet. >> Is that clear to everyone ? >> >> Existing Work -> to be edited to add prototypes >> >> Related Vocabularies -> no problem, keep >> >> Problems and Limitations -> not discussed yet. Is that clear to everyone ? >> >> Related Use Cases and Unanticipated Uses (optional) -> not discussed >> yet. Is that clear to everyone ? >> >> Library Linked Data Dimensions / Topics -> confusing. Drop it, or keep >> it only for curation ? >> >> References -> no problem, keep >> >> Prototypes and Applications -> added by Joachim. Drop it: content to be >> put under "existing work". >> >> Comments welcome on this proposal. I'm copying my mail in the discussion >> page of the template, so you're welcome to make your comments there. >> Emmanuelle >> >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Talk:Use_Case_Template >> >> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Haffner, Alexander <A.Haffner@d-nb.de >> <mailto:A.Haffner@d-nb.de>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > >> > >> > In addition to our telco from yesterday some comments to make sure >> the templates are applicable for upcoming UCs. >> > >> > First, I’d like to give some extra information regarding our template >> elaboration. Kai and I are both computer scientists so we are driven by >> experience of UC modeling (UML etc.) in the context of software >> development. As a consequence our chosen approach is similar to the one >> used in software engineering. It’s a user-centered approach. That means >> we try to identify user needs by analyzing the interaction of an actor >> (librarian, end user as data consumer, data provider – every imaginable >> user!) with a particular system (an already existing one or just an idea >> of a system). >> > >> > The conclusion of system requirements (in our case requirements for >> linked data in libraries) is in software engineering processes the next >> step and usually by use cases in this form pretty easy. However, this >> doesn’t mean this approach is best for LLD-XG needs. >> > Nevertheless, we would first like to make sure that you got our >> thinking and then we can discuss the need to modify the UC gathering >> process to suit LLD XG requirements. >> > >> > From that on we should have a closer look to the single parts of the >> UC template and the descriptions therefore. The discussion yesterday >> showed the ambiguity of the goal-section. Karen stated the major goal, >> but actually we intended to highlight (1) the actor’s goal in this >> particular UC and (2) how linked data can support this specific actor’s >> goal. This is also pointed out by the comments of Kai in the Open >> Library UC [1]. >> > >> > We have to make sure that the template is unambiguous regarding our >> common understanding of it’s purpose and intended use and after this our >> UC template should probably be ready to go… >> > >> > Cheers, Alexander >> > >> > [1] >> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Open_Library_Data >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Alexander Haffner >> > Deutsche Nationalbibliothek >> > Informationstechnik >> > Adickesallee 1 >> > D-60322 Frankfurt am Main >> > Telefon: +49-69-1525-1766 >> > Telefax: +49-69-1525-1799 >> > mailto:a.haffner@d-nb.de <mailto:a.haffner@d-nb.de> >> >> > http://www.d-nb.de >> >> >> -- >> ===== >> Emmanuelle Bermès - http://www.bnf.fr >> Manue - http://www.figoblog.org >> > > -- ===== Emmanuelle Bermès - http://www.bnf.fr Manue - http://www.figoblog.org
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 07:30:23 UTC