european collected library of artistic performance

1September 2010, Rome, Italy

European Collected Library of Artistic Performance

First requirements meeting

Lotte Belice Baltussen

TEL: +31 (0) 35 677 1755 FAX: +31 (0) 677 3208

E-mail: [email protected]

http://www.eclap.eu

Agenda: 8 September 2010

2

08:45 – 9:00 Coffee and welcome 9:00 – 11:00 DE2.1.1 Recap of the work process and work done so far. 11:00 – 11:30 Coffee break 11:30 – 13:00 Continuation of the first half of the morning: Discussing the

DE2.1.1 draft per section. 13:00 – 14:00 Lunch 14:00 – 15:00 Group brainstorm sessions

Back-end Contextualisation / enrichment Multilinguality Tools

15:00 – 15:30 Coffee break 15:30 – 16:30 Plenary presentation of the results of the group brainstorm

sessions. Impact assessment by technology providers. 16:30 – 17:00 Any other business 17:00 Finish

Methodology

B&G, UNIROMA, FRD have gathered information through:

• Desk research• Literature study• Identification of other (performings arts) portals

• Survey• Content partners• External user groups

3

DE2.1.1 set-up:

• Methodology• Survey results• User groups• Use cases• User requirements

• Functional requirements• Non-functional requirements• Digital object requirements (digital object type, content,

metadata)

4

User group structure

• The various user groups have been split into three macro categories

• For each sub-user group there is a description of their:• Profile (level of formal education, level of technological

skill)• Goal (an overview of the various ways this user group is

most likely to use the ECLAP portal)

5

Use case structure

• Number + name <the use case number + a short statement which indicates the core goal of the use case>

• Goal <brief description of what the user’s goal is with this specific use case>

• Actor(s) <overview of which of the user group(s) will execute the use case>

• Short description <a summary of the flow of events, which describes the essentials of the use case>

• Preconditions <definition of the conditions which have to be present for the use case to fully executed>

• Basic flow of events / scenarios <the numbered steps which make up the entire use case from beginning to end>

6

Use case structure

• Alternative flow <when a use case cannot be executed as described in the basic flow of events, the alternative flow describes which alternative steps will be taken by the actor>

• Postconditions <describe what changes will have occurred in the system when the use case is fully completed>

• Relationships with other use cases <if applicable, here it is noted to which use case(s) the use case is related>

7

User requirements structure

• Number (unique identifier of the requirement)

• User group type relevance• Functionality (name of the functionality)• Explanation• Priority level• Source

8

What needs to be done on DE2.1.1

• Restructure the text (put the survey results in one place, restructure the user requirements)

• Expand and refine the methodology section • Expand and refine the results of the survey• Expand and refine the user groups• Expand and refine the use cases• Expand and refine the user requirements• Determine which user requirements have which user

group relevance.

• And overall: focus on the most important use cases and requirements!

9


• Expand and refine the results of the survey

• Make distinctions between the various user groups• Rank the importance of the user requirements according to

the results of the survey

10


• Expand and refine the user groups

• The Education macro group needs to be refined more• The Legenda needs more references (how have others

defined Level of Education / Level of Technological Skill• The results from the survey needs to be incorporated

(especially regarding the suggestions of user groups by the content partners and the goals of the various user groups

11


• Expand and refine the use cases

• Only the most relevant use cases at this point should be worked out, it needs to be established which ones these are

• Is it o.k. to have a natural flow in the use cases, so that a user in the ‘Browsing’ use case also downloads a content item, or do these need to be separated into different use cases

12


• Expand and refine the user requirements

• Determine which user requirements have which user group relevance (UR, RU, CP, ADMIN)

• Make a clear distinction between the performing arts websites people indicate they have used and the requirements themselves. Also, what can we learn from existing portals

• How best to incorporate the content requirements and the proposed taxonomy

• Back-end

13


• Restructure the text

• Make the scope of DE2.1.1 more clear.• The survey results are still scattered around the document.

A single section needs to be devoted to the interpretation of the survey results.

• Relate the various sections more. In other words: make the relations between use cases, user groups and user requirements more explicit.

14

Group brainstorm sessions

• 1: Contextualisation / enrichment. What do we mean with this term, and what does it entail for ECLAP?

• 2: Multilinguality. Automatic translations of the pages and metadata / descriptions are an issue.

• 3: Tools and services. What are the most important tools and services that we want to offer to the ECLAP end-users?

• 4: Back-end. Even though there already is an extensive back-end, it needs to be identified what the most pressing issues are that need to be fixed in order for the front end to work as smoothly as possible. Also, it needs to be established how batch uploads for partners are going to work.

15


• For each group brainstorm the following points apply:

• 1 person making detailed minutes• Write down the most important user scenarios for

each group theme• Make sure you do not think too much about

specific requirements for specific user groups, but try and think of requirements that are interesting for multiple groups.

16


• Definitions

• Target users: The users that ECLAP targets, not be confused with the user groups that will be set up in order to validate the portal

• User scenario: Step-by-step overview of the actions a user can perform in order to achieve a certain task

• Use case: an instance of a user scenario, focussing only on the steps taken by the user for this specific use case

• User role: The privileges a user has on the portal (p. 32 DE2.1.1, v0.3.1)

17


• 1: Contextualisation / enrichment. What do we mean with this term, and what does it entail for ECLAP?

• Manual enrichment by content partners• Automatic enrichment• User-generated enrichment

18


• 2: Multilinguality

• Automatic translations of the pages• Automatic translations of the metadata• Automatic translations of the search queries• Translation of vocabularies / taxonomies• Semantic interoperability• (see p. 46-48 of DE2.1.1)

19


• 3: Tools and services

• Incorporating multiple digital objects into a new work• Cross-referencing digital objects• IPR Wizard• Access for disabled users• …

20


• 4: Back-end

• Batch uploads• Metadata mapping and processing (question by Erik: how

feasible would it be to incorporate the metadata of the Cultural Identification number, the Dutch ISBN for performing arts

• Implementing a bug tracking system

21


• What needs to be worked out for the deliverable:

• Tagging / annotating (folksonomy, inter-video annotation)• Monographs• Dossiers / dedicated web pages for content partners• Work out IPR sub-section in section 7

• NTUA will co-ordinate the writing of the technical part of DE2.1.1

22

Time schedule

• In order to finish DE2.1.1 in time, the following schedule needs to be followed

• 15 September: send all added and refined text on the ECLAP mailing list

• 16 September: Lotte and Paolo discuss the work to be done• 20 September: Lotte provides Paolo with the final version,

which Paolo will check• 20-30 September: Lotte and Paolo will work together in

finalising the deliverable• 30 September: Paolo submits the deliverable to the EC

23

european collected library of artistic performance

Documents

user requirementsdetermine

user requirementsexpand

user groupsexpand

user group relevance

various user groupsrank

suggestions of user

use casesexpand

use casesonly