See also: IRC log
need to collect use cases
evaluate against standards
what standards are more "popular" or relevant or pervasive
how do we connect to the user communities
do we have am EM user model
what are the challenges in the EM field
drill down to more detail
can we learn from other XGs to make our work easier
<scribe> ACTION: find out about about the geospatial XG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/11-eiif-minutes.html#action01]
are we too ambious
scope our work and make it clear
what is the "low hanging fruit"
use cases can channel our effort
opportunity to expose good data definitions
we are a doing a feasibility - not solving the whole problem
we need time to come to common understandings
tricky to pick the right use cases
mapped out in advance
need to define a purpose for the use case - what do we want to get out of them
diff in term between EM mgrs and hazard scientists
fundamental issues with terminology and language across sectors
need the operational scenarios
what is common, which is different
information needs are common
4 scenarios covering 4 disciplines
diff between information and terminology
UC: evacuation scenario
damage assessment, hazard tracking
impact on people
a range of scenarios - small to large scale
auto accident up to major disaster
start simple and scale up
<Percivall> United Nations Scenarios: http://ochaonline2.un.org/Default.aspx?tabid=8906
different language (spoken/written) increases the problems
<Percivall> USA National level scenarios: http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/nationalsecurity/earlywarning/NationalPlanningScenariosApril2005.pdf
<Percivall> Need to identify scenario at province/state level as well as single person emergency scenario
who are the actors/groups in each UC to get their perspective
how to process the UC
UC uncover the domain
UC analysis - walkthrough for common info/data elements
<Percivall> Use cases for single person response: NENA Technical Requirements Document (TRD) for Location Information to Support IP-Based Emergency Services http://www.nena.org/media/File/08-752_20061221.pdf
go thru one or two use cases
test them during the rest of the day
<scribe> ACTION: collect use cases - put on wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/11-eiif-minutes.html#action02]
<Percivall> Ideas for revised F2F agenda: 1. introductions, 2. use cases identification (1 hour), 3. Framework (deliverable planning), 4. plan of work
<Percivall> 1 hour may be too short for use cases
<Percivall> Between use cases and framework, insert discussion of relevant standards
<Percivall> oops, hit a button inadvertently
meeting logistics
use w3c teleconf
more regular teleconfernces
record the workshop (audio)
rrsagent. make log public
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: renato Inferring Scribes: renato WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. Default Present: +643383aaaa, Olle, +1.301.560.aabb, +1.425.392.aacc Present: +643383aaaa Olle +1.301.560.aabb +1.425.392.aacc WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Got date from IRC log name: 11 Apr 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/04/11-eiif-minutes.html People with action items: collect find WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]