Pre Interview:
Item |
Information/Response |
---|---|
Date: |
12/23/2009 |
Requirement # unique id <SemCon Ops Initiative>.<analysts initials><requirement number> |
Init6SD7 |
Originator/Customer's Name: |
Pathak/Forum post |
Originator/Customer's Company: |
Mayo clinic |
Summary of requirement pre-interview, by Reviewer: |
The primary actor is a cancer researcher intending to create an ontology for his/her domain. |
Recommended Next Step Enter one: Follow-up interview, Observe, Use Case Template (text), Use Case Model (formalized/UML diagram), Group Discussion, Prototype, Waiting Room |
Group discussion |
Interview
Item |
Script / Question |
Information/Response |
---|---|---|
1 |
Hello, my name is NAME. I am calling you today because NCI and caBIG are working toward a new and improved version of the semantic infrastructure to better support integration scenarios. |
yes |
2 |
Do you have any solution integration needs? If so, what are they? Have you envisioned new ways of interacting with existing or new parts of the semantic infrastructure? |
Multiple ontologies exist already, that have a well defined hierarchical relationships between the listed concepts. There is a need to reuse this information fully or partially while creating new ontologies. Therefore there is a need for a tool that would internalize these ontolologies and use them as a reference while creating new ontologies such that new ontologies can fully/partially use the relationship between various concepts. |
|
Are there any business changes you are assuming we will be able to deal with? |
Existing tools that are based on the previously existing ontologies can continue to be viable even if there are new ontologies available. |
4 |
Are there any capabilities you are expecting to be available to support your needs? |
Not sure |
5 |
Do you use any of the existing software/services? If so, what do you like or dislike about it? |
Protege plug-in NCBI bio-portal |
6 |
If this requirement in met, what would be the benefits? If you do not have it, what would be the negative impact? |
Existing software tools can continue to leverage the new ontologies thus these tools would have a longer shelf life |
7 |
If, for any reason, we were not able to create that solution, do you think there might be another way to solve this issue? Can you think of an alternative solution? |
Not sure |
8 |
Would you agree that we can summarize your requirement like this? |
There is a need for a tool that can internalize the existing ontologies and use thus as a platform when designing a new ontology |
9 |
How important is this requirement to the interviewee? Required: Customer Priority/Annotationrement Analyst |
|
10 |
On a scale from 1 to 3 with 1 being "not satisfied" to 3 "completely satisfied", how would you rate your overall satisfaction with the product if this requirement was met? (Relative rating/ranking of how satisfied or dissatisfied interviewee would be if this requirement were met/not met) |
Select:
|
11 |
Are there other requirements that you would like to share with us? I'd be more than happy to call you back another time, or if you have another 10 minutes, please share other issues you can think of. |
(If yes, take notes to use in on a new page with this template; if time not available now, try to make appointment for another call.) |
12 |
Who else should we talk to in order to elicit more information about this need? |
None |
|
For specific service enhancement or requirement from Forum entry: |
--- |
13 |
Can you or someone else give me a step-by-step description of how you would describe the expected performance/behavior of the software in order for you to feel that your requirement is met? |
The developed tools is given a database of existing ontologies |
14 |
Forum Link: |
VKC or other forum where this requirement is discussed |
15 |
URLs (optional): |
Links to pages or applications related to this requirement |
16 |
References (optional): |
Links to articles, papers or presentations related to this requirement |