[esip-semantictech] basic questions about STC Use Cases and Requirements

[Beth Huffer]

Hi John, 
You're correct that the STC Use Cases and Requirements were created to aid in the evaluation of the ontology repositories. The target use cases for the evaluation are 4.1, 4.2, 4.4 and 4.7. Some of the initial, high-level use cases were combined because they were essentially variations on the same thing. Some of the use cases were treated as functional requirements. We expect that when the evaluation begins we will work with Annie to solidify the process for the evaluation. But I think in large part the idea is       to have the evaluators attempt to do the things specified in the use cases and report on their experience. 
As for requirements, if you'd like to write up additional, or more detailed requirements, and send them around so everyone has a chance to weigh in on them, that would be great. We have tried to link requirements to use cases, and the requirements are high-level by design (somewhat). They're mostly functional requirements - users of the repository must be able to do x - because doing x is necessary for one or more use cases. For example, users must be able to browse ontologies because doing so is necessary when editing an existing ontology. But we want to be neutral about how that requirement is satisfied. We want the evaluators to just try doing this stuff, i.e, try editing an ontology. If the browsing requirement isn't satisfied, or if it is satisfied, but provides a bad user experience, we want that to come out of the evaluation. In other words, I think we want to be a little careful about saying how a requirement needs to be       satisfied. User just

> On 2/9/17 9:58 PM, John Graybeal via esip-semanticweb wrote:
> hi all,
> 
> Before I submit any questions or markup fo  the STC Use Cases and Requirements document, I wanted to clarify its goals. 
> 
> As I understand it, this document was created as a means to evaluate the ontology repositories currently available to ESIP users. As discussed in meetings late last year, following the usual ESIP evaluation methodology, the evaluation criteria will be handed out to the evaluators with instructions on how to perform the evaluation. In previous cases I've known, Annie has created those instructions to match the circumstances of the evaluation, in consultation with the evaluation customer         -- STC in this case.
> 
> So one question is, do we (the STC) have expectations for those instructions? I ask because the requirements are very lightly specified so far, roughly a list of features, so a lot of user judgment will be required to give useful feedback. If it is worth being more specific in the requirements, I can try to add some content toward that.
> 
> Also, in a few places (in 2.2, titled Evaluation of Semantic Repository Implementation Platforms), the document references semantic web technology *stacks* as an end goal of the STC. Does this, together with the document title and the broad-ranging use cases, mean this upcoming evaluation is about more than simply the semantic repository implementation? 
> 
> Finally, please remind me the preferred format for markup. Thanks!
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ========================
> John Graybeal
> Technical Program Manager
> Center for Expanded Data Annotation and Retrieval /+/ NCBO BioPortal
> Stanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research
> 650-736-1632  
> skype: graybealski
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> esip-semanticweb mailing list
> esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.deltaforce.net/pipermail/esip-semanticweb/attachments/20170514/8512a6fb/attachment.html>