...
Discussed use cases and identified priorities
Early in the meeting, the DCAT group noticed that it would not be easy to prioritize the use cases discussed during last year's meetings. Before we can argue which use cases are most important or which are the biggest pain-points at the moment, we have to prioritize persona's. For example; usability flaws in the submission forms might be a big issue for end users, but a lesser one for repository administrators.
The DCAT group decided it would be important to keep the scope on the long term development of DSpace. Meanwhile use cases should be considered both on high (more abstract) level, as on a very specific (concrete) level. We do not want to focus on use cases that could be developed by a service provider on a short therm, or that could be included in DSpace 6. Instead we want to address use cases that give direction to DSpace's core.
We should also lay focus on use cases that we 'have to have' rather than those that are 'nice to have'. These 'have to have' use cases could be enhancements of existing features as well as the development of new ones.
During this meeting we did not decide a fixed prioritization of use cases. We did however agree that we could discuss the way we as the DCAT group could help in the development of the DSpace roadmap. This will be subject of our next meeting in March.
At the moment there is a discussion going on about the future of the user interface.Currently the angle is rather technical. Maybe we should contribute our findings so this discussion would include a mixture of technical and practical issues.
Call Attendees
- Bram Luyten (@mire) - @mire
Maureen Walsh - Ohio State University
- Ignace Deroost - @mire
Valorie Hollister - DuraSpace
- Felicity Dykas - University of Missouri
- Pauline Ward - University of Edinburgh
- Elin Stangeland - University of Oslo