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@nordu.net, +45 2288 1729, @lpfischer