Presentation on theme: "Project Team Group Meeting Content Group 2001-06-11 to 2001-06-12 Stockholm."— Presentation transcript:
Project Team Group Meeting Content Group to Stockholm
YYYY/MMTitle2 Agenda Welcome(Carl, Walter) Where is the project - Results of Torino(Walter) Where are we - State-of-the-Art WP 1.1(Josef) Best-Practise-Analysis Lunch Further partner presentations User requirements analysis (Silke) Use cases and scenarios(Josef) Working groups Presentation of results of working groups 18.30Summary of day 1(Josef) End of offical day Monday,
YYYY/MMTitle3 Agenda Theme-Related access to the content(Vic, Heidi, Hub) Regional aspects and requirements, new partners Lunch Final report / white spots(Josef, Silke) Open agenda End of meeting!? Tuesday, Agenda
YYYY/MMTitle4 Where are we? State-of-the-Art WP 1.1 (IMAC Josef Herget) Work plan Description of the audit concept Updated schedule Steps already fulfilled Where are we?
YYYY/MMTitle5 1. Definition of domains First description of collections from content providers 2. Best-Practise-Analysis Analysis of existing applications worldwide in different domains (data and functions) 3. The Audit Analysis of the current practises at side of content providers & requirement analysis 4. Evaluation and Reporting Where are we? Workplan for Task 1.1 Conclude and describe user requirements
YYYY/MMTitle6 Where are we? The Audit Concept Description of the objects/ collections Collections User Requirements (Provider) Requirements of the Content Providers User Requirements (User) Requirements of the different user groups Business Processes Description of core processes/functions Products Definition of existing and new products/ services Use Cases Specification of various use situations
YYYY/MMTitle7 Where are we? Updated Schedule
YYYY/MMTitle8 Where are we? The steps already fulfilled Short description of almost all collections Domains: Archives, Libraries, Museums, Museums Shops, Artists To Do: Have to be detailed during the workshop, especially according to thematic and regional issues Best-Practise-Analysis First results were sent to the technical group To Do: Detailed analysis of Best- and Worst-Practises examples for the final report.
YYYY/MMTitle9 Where are we? The steps already fulfilled Definition of user requirements Unstructured collection of user requirements from various partners. First results were sent to the technical group. To Do: Have to be structured and completed by audit work sheet. First draft of theme related access to content To Do: Should be discussed during the workshop in order to define a set of common themes.
YYYY/MMTitle10 Best-Practise - A Summarization for REGNET (IMAC Silke Grossmann) Best-Practise - The main goals (Why?) Outline of the concept (What?) Participating partners (Who?) The main findings (Results!) Best-Practise-Analysis
YYYY/MMTitle11 Why did we do it? Best-Practise-Analysis Orientation on the international State-of-the-Art Typical features have to be adopted Learning from best and worst practises Take up excellent features, avoid mistakes Give Techies an idea how to realize Working by examples Input for user requirements definition
YYYY/MMTitle12 What did we do? Best-Practise-Analysis Analyse excellent sites in the different domains Point out best and worst practise statements Examine indepth-analysis, Detailed description of Covered information/object types and topics Addressed user groups Available user functions Used data structure(s) Design of user interface
YYYY/MMTitle13 Participating partners Best-Practise-Analysis ONB Austrian National Library SUL Stockholm University Library MUS Stichting Museum CC Consorzio Civita ICCS/UBA Union of Bulgarian Artists... Photographic and documentation systems Libraries Museum shops Artists/Art galleries Museums DomainPartner Detailed ? Next: Presentation by the partners
YYYY/MMTitle14 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 1. Access methods 1.1 Special access for special information needs Searchable database(s) / search functionality for direct access Browsing capabilities for selected items / parts of the collections, e.g. - special themes- new items - actual exhibitions- single artists - special offers- educational material Portal Services: Search, Virtual Gallery, Digital Classroom To Do: We have to select such entry points and define the portal structure!
YYYY/MMTitle15 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 1. Access methods 1.2 Personal access for personal information needs Personalisation features, e.g. - create wish lists- gather favourite works Portal Services: Possibilities to register To Do: We have to define the personalisation features in detail! 1.3 Further access methods Suggestion of related items Guided searches Intelligent navigation system To Do: We have to implement connections between itemsand select suitable navigation tools (e. g. Visual hierarchical navigation system) Portal Services: Navigation Tools
YYYY/MMTitle16 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 2. User functions 2.1 Search for objects 2.2 Picture preview 2.3 Order objects/direct sale/e-commerce 2.4 Online-help,FAQ 2.5 Information about general terms of trade 2.6 Contact forms ( e.g. request for information, technical problems, complaints/reclamations etc. ) Portal Services: Search & Order, Service and Information Area To Do: We have to integrate information about the content provided and services on offer
YYYY/MMTitle17 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 3. Description of individual features 3.1 Search Differentiation between browsing and direct search Differentiation between simple and advanced search Search modes: index search, combined field search, full search Search functionalities: boolean operators (and, or), truncations Specials: save searches for later viewing, guided searches To Do: We have to decide - criteria usable in simple and advanced search - fields which are controlled by thesaurus/word lists - further search services (e. g. brokerage services)
YYYY/MMTitle18 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 3. Description of individual features 3.2 Display options Objects are presented by thumbnails/enlarged view Differentiation between brief information/full information Advanced display option: present samples (e.g. pages of the book, video) To Do: We have to define what kind of access should be allowed (for each content provider and each object type)
YYYY/MMTitle19 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 3. Description of individual features 3.3 Ordering State-of-the-Art: Mail order form Online payment is highly desirable Payments should be possible both by credit card and cheque, and... To Do: We have to agree about transaction management 3.4 Delivery of objects State-of-the-Art: FTP, , ISDN Special: Delivery by CD-ROM, direct download
YYYY/MMTitle20 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 3. Description of individual features 3.5 Value added services, e.g. Search saves Search service Online ordering Newsletter Personalisation features GRPS services Community services (forum) Interactive tools for publishing Value added services for members (discounts, electronic postcards, own homepages...) To Do: What services are desirable and realistic? (need to have and nice to have)
YYYY/MMTitle21 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 4. Methods of object presentation 4.1 Integration of different object types 4.2 Merging of different content providers 4.3 Differentiation between object information and bibliographic information 4.4 No unique (subject) classification scheme (keywords, classification, thesauri, product classification) To Do: We have to decide about the data format for our portal (dependent on actual data formats on the part of the content providers (migration); use of existing standards)
YYYY/MMTitle22 A summarization for REGNET Best-Practise-Analysis 5. Access and cost models 5.1 Distinction between free and restricted services 5.2 Value added services for registered users 5.3 Lower costs for members (?) What we need for the final report: - Detailed summarization - Further Best-Practise-Examples - Other relevant projects -...
YYYY/MMTitle23 User Requirements Analysis: Main Findings (IMAC Silke Grossmann) The audit work sheet - What we did What we know - What we need Some results (overview) User Requirements Analysis
YYYY/MMTitle24 The audit - the second module The audit work sheet - What we did User Requirements Analysis 1. General description of existing collections Provider, name, online version, domain 2. Description of data management Which systems / inventories, degree of digitisation, tools 3. Use of standards for formal and subject description International standards, own strucktures, keywords Components of the system Services for internal users, end user services 5. User Groups Internal user groups, external user groups
YYYY/MMTitle25 The audit - the second module The audit work sheet - What we did User Requirements Analysis 6. Usage of system/collection (use cases) Contemporary usage/future usage, internal/exernal usage 7. User requirements What do you want to do with the system? - General goals - General requirements - Technical requirements - Data management - Functional requirements What do your users want to do?
YYYY/MMTitle26 The audit - the second module What we know / What we need Given input from partners User Requirements Analysis ONB Austrian National Library SUL Stockholm University Library KVA Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences MUS Stichting Museum ICCS/UBA Union of Bulgarian Artists DescriptionPartner Presentation by the partners Audit ++ +(+) Audit Sheet for detailed information about data management, user groups and use cases ++ +(+) Audit Sheet only for the Rare Book Collection, not for Portrait Collection
YYYY/MMTitle27 The audit - the second module What we know / What we need Given input from partners User Requirements Analysis LMG Länsmuseet pa Gotland ALI Alinari MECH Museum of Mechelen DescriptionPartner Presentation by the partners Audit Audit Sheet with detailed description of user requirements One Audit Sheet for two collections: Shop and Museum Collection !?
YYYY/MMTitle28 The audit - the second module What we know / What we need Given input from partners User Requirements Analysis NRM Swedísh Natural History Museum GRAN Granollers City Council DescriptionPartnerAudit Only a short description of the Shop, no Audit Suggestion in order to handle white spots: - Missing audits have to be delivered until Friday! - Use cases could be worked out in working groups this afternoon CC Consorzio Civita (-)- No own content, but connections to several museums. Final decision not founded !
YYYY/MMTitle29 The results - An overview 1. Available collections User Requirements Analysis 1. Länsmuseet pa Gotland 2. Stichting Museum Domain: Museums (collections/shops) records, 5000 images (jpg) in picture archive. Suggested selection for REGNET: Museum Shop (already online realised on the basis of MS Access database). Own data structure (10-15 fields), no subject classification. How many objects ? Shop objects: managed by automated museum system (Gallery Systems). Suggested to make a selection according to themes (will be discussed later). Data structures/ Standards? Collection
YYYY/MMTitle30 The results - An overview 1. Available collections User Requirements Analysis 3. Museum of Mechelen 4. Swedísh Natural History Museum Domain: Museums (collections/shops) objects, cataloging with ADLIB started (a few hundred). Suggested to deliver texts and object descriptions related to two topics : gilt leather (10 thematic texts, 80 objects) and gods and saints (thematic and specific texts, more than 150 texts and images concerning objects). Details about thematic approach. Collection 2000 objects in the shop with some scanned pictures, postcards and posters. In the shops mainly book, dissertations, textiles etc. are sold? Collection with about 8.9 Mill. Objects. Museum Shop or collection!? Detailed information! Shop?
YYYY/MMTitle31 The results - An overview 1. Available collections User Requirements Analysis 5. Consorzio Civita 6. Austrian National Library Domain: Museums (collections/shops) Gateway to different museums (e. g. Istituto e museo di Storia della Scienza di Firenze, France Louvre). Final decision not made. Detailed information has to be provided as soon as possible. Collection(s) Integration of museum shop (partly) possible. Final decision! Shop?
YYYY/MMTitle32 The results - An overview 1. Available collections User Requirements Analysis 7. Stockholm University Library Domain: Library (special collections) Rare book collection (owned by KVA, maintained at SUL) objects (books, manuscripts, maps) on card catalogue. Currently conversion of card catalogue with Libris on the basis of MARC (which is converted in MARC 21). Subject classification: SAB - Swedish Classification System. OPAC (Voyager System). Collection(s)
YYYY/MMTitle33 The results - An overview 1. Available collections User Requirements Analysis 8. Royal Swedish Academy of Science Domain: Photo archive (Photographic and documentation) Portrait collection, 2000 portraits (card catalogue) and photos (card catalogue), a minor part is digitised. Detailed description. Collection 9. Austrian National Library Picture archive, digital archive catalogue with 1,2 Mio. cards (system: STAR). The whole card catalogue is digitized (jpeg). Standards: ONB uses currenty PND (Person Norm data). Own data format, future use of AMICO is intended. Selection necessary? Collection
YYYY/MMTitle34 The results - An overview 1. Available collections User Requirements Analysis 10. Alinari Domain: Image Archive 3,5 Mio. objects, more than images catalogued and digitalized. More than artists represented. Own data format, keyword and fulltext access. Detailed description/use cases! Selection! Themes? Collection 11. ICCS / Union of Bulgarian Artists 500 objects in virtual gallery (with auctions). Catalogue: MySQL database for Linux, 60 objects digitized (jpeg). Described by own data structure, keywords. Suggestion: Start with objects out of the category Painting. Collection
YYYY/MMTitle35 Die Themen The results - An overview 2. Main requirements User Requirements Analysis General expectations for the portal site REGNET 1. Easy, fast and thematic access to a variety of geographically distributed information = Single point of entry to CH data world-wide 2. Better cooperation with other institutions / Network effects in terms of participation in professional communities 3. Wider presentation of own collections 4. New user groups Some statements
YYYY/MMTitle36 The results - An overview 3. Technical requirements User Requirements Analysis System requirements 1. Client/Server application 2. Web Interface for end user access and data editing/ administration 3. Security: Support of different levels of authorizations for administrators, users, user groups and guests. Authorizations for specific data fields/modules System availability: 7/24, enhanced documentation and support (e. g. help desk, technical support, manuals) Some statements
YYYY/MMTitle37 The results - An overview 4. Functional requirements User Requirements Analysis Functions to be covered by REGNET (internal) 1. Data management: Standard data structure for object description but: possibility to define own data fields (supported by the software). Support of international standards/protocols: Z39.30, MARC, Dublin Core, CHIN. Support of hierarchical and networked structures for the accession of complex objects. Development of a structure of texts based on themes Data input/output: A clear data entry system: mandatory fields and optional fields. Predefinde print formats. Indexing of fields, vocabulary control, data import and export facilities... Some statements
YYYY/MMTitle38 The results - An overview 5. Functional requirements User Requirements Analysis Functions to be covered by REGNET (internal) 3. Digitising (systems and methodologies to do so) 4. Intellectual property rights management 5. Search functionality (Full text search, field search...) 6. Navigation/Browsing.... AND: Domain-specific functions! Some statements
YYYY/MMTitle39 The results - An overview 6. End user requirements (esp. User interface) User Requirements Analysis 1. Fast access 2. Simple and well structured site 3. Userfriendly interface - GUI standards - Multilingual interface (switch between languages) - Web/Browser oriented 4. Simple/advanced search capabilities 5. Support by customer service unit/online help Some statements MUST
YYYY/MMTitle40 The results - An overview 6. End user requirements (esp. User interface) User Requirements Analysis 1. Easy ordering (online ordering desirable) 2. Community services (e. g. forum, discussions) 3. Personalisation services (save profiles) 4. Push services (news & alert services, e. g. for new items, new exhibitions, special offers) 5. Different user profiles (B2B, B2C, C2C) 6. High Some statements SHOULD
YYYY/MMTitle41 The open questions => Further specifications through use cases (next session) User Requirements Analysis
YYYY/MMTitle42 Introduction to Use Cases and Scenarios (IMAC Josef Herget) Use Cases and Scenarios
YYYY/MMTitle43 Use Cases are a way of structuring the requirement analysis according to the way in which a user uses the system. In which phase of the system developing process are Use Cases elaborated? Use Cases and Scenarios
YYYY/MMTitle44 Large software systems consist of a set of use cases. In order to enable transparency use-case-diagrams are elaborated which show all the actors at a specific use case and the name of the use case. Use-Case-Diagramme Use Cases and Scenarios Library system Search for a book Library user
YYYY/MMTitle45 Use Cases and Scenarios Librarian
YYYY/MMTitle46 Library user Use Cases and Scenarios
YYYY/MMTitle47 Use Cases and Scenarios
YYYY/MMTitle48 Use Cases and Scenarios
YYYY/MMTitle49 Use Cases and Scenarios
YYYY/MMTitle50 Final Report - Structure, Content & White Spots (IMAC Silke Grossmann) Final Report
YYYY/MMTitle51 Final Report Suggestion of a structure 1. Introduction 1.1 Objectives of Task 1.1 & Context 1.2 Project Partners and Roles 1.3Workplan and concept 2. Current Practise: Content Provider 2.1 The collections 2.2 Software & hardware currently in use 2.3 Data Formats and migration plans 2.4 Supported functions
YYYY/MMTitle52 Final Report Suggestion of a structure 3. Best-Practise-Examples 3.1 Best-Practise in different domains 3.2 Conclusion for the REGNET system 4. Description of the REGNET system 4.1 Typology of users & services and products 4.2 Use cases - functions and processes 4.3 General requirements 4.4 Specific requirements