RE: [egov] Proposed Use Case template

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Thanks, Ockert,

This is good news, even if Windows-specific in terms of OS on which 
the toolset works, which is okay for me personally since it supports 
Java and C++ which can then be worked on other platforms.

However, the question at issue isn't the cost of the toolset or even 
a choice between one or another modeling language per se, although I 
personally prefer UML. The question is one of grounding the 
derivation of the use-cases. The simplified model of ontological 
participants Farrukh suggests is very high level and assumes a Domain 
Expert, Content Publisher and a Registry Group and that's fine at a 
high level. I'm suggesting developing lower level scenarios more 
appropriate to the domains for which Farrukh's model assumes a Domain 
Expert.

I think we might want to put our initial focus there, gathering 
exemplar scenarios that uses the template I offered which has already 
seen some successful use in the WSRP TC for laying out roles, 
functions and responsibilities before a modeling tool or model is 
applied to formally analyze, operate, prepare comparative reports and 
distribute reports in preparation for policy-making decisions or 
other management actions. I think it might be wise to prepare such 
materials in order to define requirements for what is needed to 
perform functions such as gathering specific data inputs, classifying 
and sorting inputs, filling in forms, performing transforms, 
allocating IT resources, compiling statistical knowledge 
representations of transformed data, preparing decision-making 
models, etc.

In other words, it is actually a workflow decision on whether to 
assume we know enough a priori to move immediately to a use-case 
model or whether evaluating a population of scenarios grounded in 
actual experience beforehand makes sense. The one reason I can think 
of that favors evaluating scenarios first is that there may be more 
than one or even a few use-case models that would serve better in 
different situations, such as the differences between environmental 
impact reports and developing building codes for different 
microclimates and/or geological factors, or evaluating the effects of 
trade policies long and short term, etc. I suspect that we probably 
will find that we need to narrow down what constitutes a Domain 
Expert for different domain sets.

Ciao,
Rex

At 7:06 AM +0200 2/11/04, Ockert Cameron wrote:
>We use a modeling tool called EA from http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/ - it
>is very powerfull, and can run standalone or using a central RDBMS such as
>MySQL. In terms of international recognized tool sets such as Rose, EA is
>around 28 times cheaper, and have almost comparable functionality. Would the
>use of such a tool not potentially solve the problem?
>
>Regards
>Ockert Cameron
>Solutions Architect
>Dept of Justice and Constitutional Development
>South Africa
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM]
>Sent: 10 February 2004 10:44 PM
>To: Rex Brooks
>Cc: Tim Benson; OASIS eGov list
>Subject: Re: [egov] Proposed Use Case template
>
>Rex Brooks wrote:
>
>>
>>  If what is being proposed fits the actual scenarios, then we will know
>>  that we are grounded. Being grounded is more important, it seems to
>>  me, than creating structures at this point, although I am sure that a
>>  great deal of experience with "systems" has gone into this model, and
>>  it may well be accurate and useful, but I can't tell that in the abstract.
>
>I agree that being grounded is more important. I was assuming (maybe
>incorrectly) that structure helps achive grounding. I certainly do not want
>to be overly prescriptive to the point were structure (the means) becomes a
>barrier to achieving grounding (the end).
>
>>
>>  Please take no offense, Farrukh, I hope it proves out that your model
>>  is well drawn and fits many more instances than those I cite, but I
>  > have no background that enables me to reckon that.
>
>Absolutely none taken. You raise a valid concern that we could get bogged
>down by form rather than focus on substance.
>
>My suggetsion came from having observed in many situation discussion that
>sometime tend to meander without any governing structure. Use cases are an
>important methodology for addressing that. I went a step further to suggest
>a form for managing use cases.
>In the Semantic Content Management SC we are trying on the side of more
>formal structure with hyperlinks between use cases etc.
>Lets see how this works out.
>
>We have a wealth of experience here in the egov TC. What may help is to hear
>what people's experience has been in managing use cases effectively.
>Thanks.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Farrukh
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
>OASIS TC), go to
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.ph
>p.


-- 
Rex Brooks
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
Email: rexb@starbourne.com
Tel: 510-849-2309
Fax: By Request