Karen, I had the same experience. I expected something different from a
questionnaire and was a bit shocked when I scrolled through the
explanations. But to be honest, I am really not very patient with these
things. Maybe I will give it another try when I have more time.
Evelyn
Am 17.04.2015 um 02:07 schrieb Karen Coyle:
> Did anyone attempt this questionnaire? I gave it 5 minutes then gave
> up on it. I'm wondering if anyone had a different experience.
>
> kc
>
> On 4/15/15 5:01 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>> On 4/15/15 2:44 PM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>
>>>> But it gives me an idea, if you don't mind us stealing
>>>> yours, which is that DCMI (which is working now to come up with a
>>>> set of "core" validation requirements) could do a "plain language"
>>>> questionnaire for our GLAM colleagues on validation needs. That
>>>> would also help us define our priorities.
>>>
>>> It uses a few scripts (
>>> perl CGI backend to record submissions on the server,
>>> a bit of js to query the backend and autofill previous answers,
>>> and some glitzy stuff to inspire epileptic seizures
>>> ). Do you need that stuff?
>>
>>
>> No, I think we could just use natural language questions, like:
>> "Are some of your elements mandatory? Are some of your elements
>> repeatable? Do you need to create limits like "A or B" in which it is
>> either A or B but not both? "... in which you can use both A and B if
>> you wish".... etc.
>>
>> Amazing, isn't it, that you can do all of that with such ancient
>> technology?
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> kc
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> kc
>>>>
>>>> On 4/15/15 10:09 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>>>> In some Mayo grant work, I have prepared a questionnaire on the
>>>>> expressivity of shape expressions. It presents a high-level language
>>>>> for expressing RDF constraints, explains a number of the technical
>>>>> points, and asks the user for which features and technical approaches
>>>>> are important to their work and their view of what will make the
>>>>> language successful. There are a couple places where you can click
>>>>> for
>>>>> extra geekiness, in case the baseline geekiness was insufficient.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like people to fill out the form imagining their immediate uses
>>>>> for RDF validation as well as those that may come with new markets
>>>>> enabled by the existence of such RDF validating tooling. The form
>>>>> will
>>>>> record your results whenever you hit submit so you can easily revisit
>>>>> your answers after reflection.
>>>>>
>>>>> This work is supported in part by a NIH U01 grant – caCDE-QA
>>>>> (1U01CA180940-01A1).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
>>>
>>
>
--
|