Instructions
Follow the script instructions and record the information in the designated table cells. You may wish to make notes below the questions.
Pre Interview:
Item |
Information/Response |
---|---|
Date: |
12/17/2009 |
Requirement # unique id <SemCon Ops Initiative>.<analysts initials><requirement number> |
Init1pm11 |
Originator/Customer's Name: |
|
Originator/Customer's Company: |
NCI |
Stakeholder Community:
|
Software and Application designers and architects |
Summary of requirement pre-interview, by Reviewer: |
Domain analysis models play a central role in providing a common framework for implementation models. Within the life sciences domain a first pass domain analysis model called the LSDAM is being produced. Ultimately this model will need to be revised and refined so that it can play a role in the life sciences domain analogous to the role played by the BRIDG model in the clinical trial space. The architectural and semantics expectations regarding future development of this model will play a role in driving refinement, however the functional and structural requirements of the life sciences domain must drive the evolution of the model and the tactics that are defined for its use. DAMs are authored by Information Modelers, overseen by Metadata Curators, and reused by Information Modelers and Software Engineers. |
The issues with the current infrastructure and business practices are that the required domain models typically only hold the classes, attributes, associations, some models contain enumerations, but not all. And no other constraints on submitting formalized behaviors.
In order to localize, or constrain a DAM, such as BRIDG, a developer needs to understand the rules that apply to the model, and what is allowed to be changed. Can the value domain be changed? can a different code list be used? etc. One example was around activity classes in BRIDG when trying to develop COPPA. "They were very complicated and we didn't know (without talking to the developer or seeing the data) if they were complete or not complete (e.g., specific enough or too general or wrong or ambiguous, semantically)" WE need to understand more about this requirement in order to develop a use case.
|
Recommended Next Step Enter one: Follow-up interview, Observe, Use Case Template (text), Use Case Model (formalized/UML diagram), Group Discussion, Prototype, Waiting Room |
Followup Interview |
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. |
If yes, proceed. If no, note a good time to call back. |
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? |
Notes describing potential interactions |
3 |
Are there any business changes you are assuming we will be able to deal with? |
Notes on anticipated business changes |
4 |
Are there any capabilities you are expecting to be available to support your needs? |
Notes that identify capabilities, tools, and/or services expected |
5 |
Do you use any of the existing software/services? If so, what do you like or dislike about it? |
Yes OR No/ Notes that fully describe the requirement |
6 |
If this requirement in met, what would be the benefits? If you do not have it, what would be the negative impact? |
Summary of perceived benefit or negative impact |
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? |
Description of any other solution that customer can envision |
8 |
Would you agree that we can summarize your requirement like this? |
Requirement statement accepted by interviewee |
9 |
How important is this requirement to the interviewee? Required: Customer Priority/Annotationrement Analyst |
Select:
|
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? |
Name of contact(s) |
|
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? |
Well defined measurable verifiable expectation |
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 |
Post Interview - ongoing throughout development of use cases:
Item |
Description |
Information/Response |
---|---|---|
Requirement Type (required) |
Analyst's assessement of the most appropriate category/type of requirement (no need to ask interviewee):
|
|
ConOp Initiative(s) |
|
|
Use Case Linkage (required) |
Which use case(s) is this requirement linked to? (should follow Use Case numbering scheme <SemCon Ops Initiative>.<analysts initials><requirement number>.<use case number>, for example Init1dbw1.1, Init1dbw1.2, Init2dbw2.1, 2.2, etc. |
Init1pm11.u - LS DAM refinement and utilization https://wiki.nci.nih.gov/x/rgtyAQ |
Conflicts / Dependencies(required) |
Are there any conflicts with other requirements / use cases? |
Yes OR No - If yes, what and why? |
Next Step (required) |
After reviewing the results of the interview, the forum, and all other materials related to this requirement, the analyst should recommend the next step, then attach the Tiny Link (on the Info tab) for this page to the Master List table. |
Enter one: Follow-up interview, Observe, Use Case Template (text), Use Case Model (formalized/UML diagram), Group Discussion, Prototype, Waiting Room |