Difference between revisions of "Oct. 5, 2005"
From Metadata-Registry
(→Immediate next steps in preparation for meeting in Ithaca:) |
|||
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
1. What do we need to get accomplished before and at our F2F meeting? From our Monday agenda: | 1. What do we need to get accomplished before and at our F2F meeting? From our Monday agenda: | ||
+ | ==Immediate next steps in preparation for meeting in Ithaca:== | ||
+ | #Completion of first iteration of draft Use Cases <b>Action item:</b> Agreed Diane will have initial iteration done by next Wed. meeting | ||
+ | #We discussed briefly the new cases and whether adding/changing relationships should be broken out; decided it might be contextual. | ||
− | |||
− | |||
* Begin work on RDF resource modeling | * Begin work on RDF resource modeling | ||
* Agent class (stemming from Use Cases) | * Agent class (stemming from Use Cases) | ||
− | + | * Organizations | |
− | + | * Maintainers | |
− | + | * Registry Managers | |
− | + | * System Administrator | |
− | + | * Visitor | |
− | + | * Registered User | |
− | + | * Organization Contact | |
* SKOS (working vocabulary representation) | * SKOS (working vocabulary representation) | ||
* Concept Schemes | * Concept Schemes | ||
* Concepts | * Concepts | ||
− | # Descriptive | + | #Descriptive |
− | # Administrative | + | #Administrative |
+ | ##Modelling versions | ||
+ | |||
+ | F2F meeting: | ||
+ | #Roles for all parties defined better, so we can make best use of individual capabilities and skills | ||
+ | #Tasks and dependencies set up so that we don't get stymied by duelling priorities, etc. | ||
+ | #Determining what triggers a new version, also requirements for semantic understanding--what are the policy questions? The implications? | ||
+ | #Use cases are focusing on project start, but we should attempt to flesh out where we want to go second year (<b>Action item:</b> Stuart will add use cases for Application Profiles) | ||
+ | #Triage in terms of which functions the most important for 'success' --leading to roadmap of the entire two years specifying which functions nice to have but less important, etc. | ||
+ | #<b>Action item:</b> Diane will ask DLESE and ENC for vocabularies we can put into SKOS/OWL as well as NSDL vocabularies (GEM). |
Latest revision as of 12:12, 5 October 2005
Teleconference, Wednesday, Oct. 5, 2005
1. What do we need to get accomplished before and at our F2F meeting? From our Monday agenda:
Immediate next steps in preparation for meeting in Ithaca:
- Completion of first iteration of draft Use Cases Action item: Agreed Diane will have initial iteration done by next Wed. meeting
- We discussed briefly the new cases and whether adding/changing relationships should be broken out; decided it might be contextual.
* Begin work on RDF resource modeling * Agent class (stemming from Use Cases) * Organizations * Maintainers * Registry Managers * System Administrator * Visitor * Registered User * Organization Contact * SKOS (working vocabulary representation) * Concept Schemes * Concepts #Descriptive #Administrative ##Modelling versions
F2F meeting:
- Roles for all parties defined better, so we can make best use of individual capabilities and skills
- Tasks and dependencies set up so that we don't get stymied by duelling priorities, etc.
- Determining what triggers a new version, also requirements for semantic understanding--what are the policy questions? The implications?
- Use cases are focusing on project start, but we should attempt to flesh out where we want to go second year (Action item: Stuart will add use cases for Application Profiles)
- Triage in terms of which functions the most important for 'success' --leading to roadmap of the entire two years specifying which functions nice to have but less important, etc.
- Action item: Diane will ask DLESE and ENC for vocabularies we can put into SKOS/OWL as well as NSDL vocabularies (GEM).