Init4hm1- LexWiki

Date: 

01/19/2010

Requirement # unique id <SemConOps Initiative>.<analysts initials><requirement number>
e.g. Init1dbw1
(eventually linked to Use Cases)

Init4hm1

Originator/Customer's Name:

Guoqian Jiang                                                                                  

Originator/Customer's Company:

Mayo Clinic

Summary of requirement initial analysis, by Reviewer: (as unambiguously as possible, describe who (List of Actors) is interacting with the system, what the business goal is and how the system might support the actor's ability to acheive their goal)

Domain Experts (researchers) use the LexWiki to review and edit the content of a terminology. It is important to enhance the flexibility and usability of the LexWiki in the following areas.
1. Enhance the LexWiki through LexEVS services (e.g., valueset management and binding mechanism)
a. semantic query mechanism (e.g. query against "body structure" branch of SNOMED CT)
b. minimal context binding (e.g., synonyms, direct parents/children)

2. Workflow component modularization and customization
a. Identify the workflow components
b. Make workflow component reusable
c. Make workflow components easy for customization in order to meet different requirements

3. leverage the Web 2.0 technologies into LexWiki

—

Recommended Next Step Enter one: Follow-up interview, Observe, Use Case Template (text), Use Case Model (formalized/UML diagram), Group Discussion, Prototype, Waiting Room

Interview

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.
Our first step was to organize requirements collected over the past year. Your organization has expressed a requirement/need for BRIEF STATEMENT OF USER REQUIREMENT.  This has been identified as potentially a critical component to support application/data and service integration, and we need more information in order to enable us to meet this requirement.
Do you have about 30 minutes to talk about this?

Yes.
                                                                                                                    

2

What do you do? What are your goals for the next year?  Why are you doing this?

To enhance the functionality of the LexWiki. To provide a more flexible and usable platform for researchers to review, edit and make consensuses.

3

In interacting with the caBIG infrastructure, 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?
(prompt to elicit changes/new ways of using the infrastructure)

---

4

Are there any business changes you are assuming we will be able to deal with? 
(prompt to elicit changes/new ways of using the infrastructure) 

Notes on anticipated business changes

5

Are there any capabilities you are expecting to be available to support your needs? 
(prompt to elicit expectations/dependencies)

Notes that identify capabilities, tools, and/or services expected

6

Do you use any of the existing software/services? If so, what do you like or dislike about it?
(if related to existing capability)

Yes. In the LexEVS, there is a prototype system AJAX to implement the valueset management and binding mechanism. Currently, the workflow for the BiomedGT works for OWL ontology. It is ad hoc approach and not suitable for others such as RadLex (Protege Frame). It will improve the reuse of the workflow components if we can identify common modules.

7

If this requirement is met, what would be the benefits? If you do not have it, what would be the negative impact?
(prompt to elicit benefits/value - will help to prioritize)

Summary of perceived benefit or negative impact

8

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?
(prompt to elicit alternative solutions/workarounds)
(to be prepared by the Requirement Analyst)

Description of any other solution that customer can envision

9

Would you agree that we can summarize your requirement like this?
(Summarize one requirement in 2-3 lines and read back to interviewee for confirmation.)

Domain Experts (researchers) use the LexWiki to review and edit the content of a terminology. It is important to enhance the flexibility and usability of the LexWiki in the following areas.
1. Integrate with LexEVS:  enhance LexWiki with valueset management and binding mechanism through LexEVS services (e.g., LexAjax)
2. Workflow component modularization and customization: identify workflow components and make them reusable
3. leverage the Web 2.0 technologies into LexWik:  investigate a social collaboration model using web2.0 principles

10

How important is this requirement to the interviewee? Required: Customer Priority/Annotationrement Analyst
(Provides concrete assessment of the relative importance for the requirements specification)

1. Must have

11

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)

1. Completely satisfied

12

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.
(prompt to elicit any hidden - potentially higher priority requirements if they exist)

(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.)

13

Who else should we talk to in order to elicit more information about this need?

N/A

For specific service enhancement or requirement from Forum entry:

---

14

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? 
(Required: Fit Criterion - will help us create test cases and user acceptance criteria - to be prepared by the Requirement Analyst)

Well defined measurable verifiable expectation

15

Forum Link:

https://cabig-kc.nci.nih.gov/Vocab/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=123

16

URLs (optional):

LexWiki
http://biomedgt.nci.nih.gov/index.php/Main_Page

17

References (optional):

Links to articles, papers or presentations related to this requirement