On 11 Oct 2018, at 8:36, Ryan Davies wrote:
Hi GREN Mapping Initiative folks,
We have had about two weeks to review the user stories document, and
have made many changes to it, some of them obvious and some subtle.
Attached, find the consolidated document, ready for submission to the
GNA Tech WG for comment, along with our draft charter. Note that we
are not seeking formal approval, only feedback.
Ryan, thanks for your work on this.
Reviewing this, I see some confusion between user storied focused on the
end-user mapping application, and those focused on the data that must
exist for the application to work.
We have previously agreed that our focus is on data format,
representation, and exchange. Capturing user requirements for the
mapping application is of course important; we need those to derive the
attributes / meta-data to record in the data exchange format. However,
user stories that centre only on how the mapping applications works
(infinite scroll, centering, zoom) do not inform the data requirements.
I think that in this iteration, we should focus on user stories that do
inform the choice of data format and exchange, and we should make an
effort to make sure the set if reasonably complete for at least a known
set of mapping applications. The way I like to think about this, we are
not trying to derive the requirements for a mapping application; we are
trying to derive the requirements for the data that will allow such an
application to be built.
To this end, I not that you have removed two user stories
- one about being able to show only inter-continental or inter-region
links
- one about being able to map links to specific (physical) cables
If we remove those, and the meta-data that go along with them, then
there are types of maps that cannot be made from the data (i.e., without
the first one, you can’t create the GNA map)
I’ve attached the document with some comments.
/Lars
--
Lars Fischer - Strategy & Policy, NORDUnet
<lars(a)nordu.net>, +45 2288 1729, @lpfischer