Re: AboutThem.info VPS

[Owen Ambur]

Sounds good, Naval.  Will look forward to seeing how the query application works.

While nothing can be simple, Gaya is also making progress on converting the South Carolina agency accountability reports from Excel to StratML format.

If she is successful, good next steps will be to show how: a) they can be made readily accessible to stakeholders in the query service, and b) how the performance indicators they contain can be made readily comprehensible, including in graphical format.

Again, I don't want to take on more complexity than we can handle at once but FYI w/re prospects for future consideration.

Owen Ambur

https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur/

On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 11:55:29 AM EST, Naval Sarda <nsa...@epicomm.net> wrote:

Hi Owen,

We have got access to the server. We will let you know how things progresses.

Naval

[deleted]

[Naval Sarda]

Hi Owen,

We have deployed the application on server and are testing the application and fixing issues. We will get back to you once the application is ready for your review.

We can begin analysis on next requirement in parallel. Let me know if you want us to review performance.gov data. If so, which organisations data is available for tracking the goals.

Naval

[Owen Ambur]

Thanks for the progress update, Naval.  Will look forward to seeing how well the basic StratML-enabled query application works.  I suspect several iterations may be required to get it working properly (and will be pleasantly surprised if that proves not to be the case).

Scraping data from the Performance.gov site is not in my plan and I don't want to spend much, if any, of my money doing that.  However, if you think you can do it for relatively little cost, I'm open to hearing what you have in mind and how it relates to the data already available for U.S. federal agencies in the StratML collection.

Unlike the Obama adminstration's version of the site, I don't think the current version has an API.  Also, if memory serves me correctly, the API was essentially worthless because the performance indicators weren't linked to the goals and objectives they suppported.   https://obamaadministration.archives.performance.gov/api.1.html  However, if it were possible to logically integrate that data with the more recent data, that would be interesting to see, since there is currently no way to track performance on agency objectives across adminstrations.

On the other hand, I'm hesitant to start considering next steps until after we've confirmed that all of the elements of my initial technical development plan have been well addressed and we've given potential users the opportunity to provide usability and utility feedback.  However, if we were to begin considering additional features, it seems to me that rendering the performance indicators graphically might be the logical next increment of value.

See StratML tool, app, and service requirement Objective 7.2: Graphics - Provide graphical displays of the data to enable humans to more easily perceive and understand trends and relationships.

If Gaya is able to successfully complete conversion of the South Carolina agency accountability reports to StratML Part 2 format, they would be a good set with which to demonstrate such capabilities.

Beyond that another set of requirements that might provide a good focus for additional effort is outlined under Goal 8: Relationships - Enable human beings to see and verify candidate relationships identified by automated services and to draft concise narrative descriptions of such relationships as well as to nominate such relationships not previously identified.

However, as previously noted, I don't want to get into the business of maintaining UIDs and passwords.  So we'd need to figure out how best to support such input and feedback without imposing an unmanageable level of administrative overhead.  Ideally, those who wish to document such relationships would do so within the context of their own plans (&/or about them statements they are submitting for others), using the stratML:Relationship elements and the regular submission/import feature of the query service.

Owen Ambur

https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur/

[Naval Sarda]

Hi Owen,

We have reviewed the plan again. Following are the points which are not in current scope of work

1) Advance search
2) Adhoc-import

For Adhoc import, we did share mockups in the very beginning. You had mentioned that adhoc import is on lower priority at that point of time

Then we reviewed the table in bulk import goal/objective. We found 5 files to be blank from sitemap.xml. Rest of them have been imported.

Rest of them have been covered in this phase.

Naval

[Owen Ambur]

Naval, to clarify, ad hoc importing by others is not critical in the initial implementation but the capability for me to do so is.

It must be relatively easy for me to add files to the collection in the query service, either by directly uploading them or providing their URLs, e.g., in my sitemap listing.

Ideally, the import capability would save me from having to maintain my alphabetically sorted browse listing at https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm  However, in essence that's what the query results listings will do.  So I'll need to see if I find those results to be sufficient to overcome my sense of needing to continue maintaining and updating my static hyperlinked index of the files.

If you can provide a listing of the URLs for the five files you found to be blank, I'll check to see if I can figure out the problem with them.  The scripting that Joe Carmel provided to generate the listing at https://stratml.us/carmel/catalogsitemap.html sometimes misses files as well, perhaps due to network issues.  It may be time for me to run it again to see if it identifies missing files as well.  One of the issues with that scripting is that it reindexes the entire sitemap listing each time rather than just the files added since the last time it was run.  So it takes a long time to finish.

Owen Ambur

https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur/

[Naval Sarda]

Hi Owen,

For you to do adhoc import or update existing entry, there are two options -

1) We provide a separte URL which you can login and update
2) We provide an admin login option on top right corner. If you are logged in, it will provide an edit icon with each result. This can take you to reupload xml file, provide a URL or provide editing interface there itself. Another option is to hit refresh to reimport the data from external URL which will already be stored in the application. There can be mass refresh or individual refresh.

Naval

[Owen Ambur]

Naval, I want to keep the public interface as simple as possible and would not want to create the impression that users can create log-on accounts.

So the first option seems best at this point.  

However, after we're confident the initial iteration of the service is working well, I'll look forward to learning more about the additional issues raised in your second option.

Owen Ambur

https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur/

[Naval Sarda]

Hi Owen,

While testing query service, we came across a query as attached. Please review

Naval

[Owen Ambur]

Naval, I will not be surprised if the Goal/Objective Descriptions are unpopulated in a few of the files, but here's what I've found with respect to the three files showing no Description for the queried Goals/Objectives in the screen shot you forwarded:

https://stratml.us/carmel/PI3wStyle.xml - While this file includes 21 references to "education," they are all in the Descriptions of the Stakeholders and not in the Names or Descriptions of the Goals.

https://stratml.us/carmel/IFLA2010wStyle.xml - One reference to "education" but not in the Description of a Goal or Objective.

https://stratml.us/drybridge/Arca.xml - "Education" appears in Other Information about a Goal, not in the Description of the Goal.

It looks like the scope of the queries is not being limited to the Names & Descriptions of the Goals & Objectives and, if that is the case, that the Description is not displayed even if it exists.

BTW, it is probably OK to query the Other Information elements along with the Name & Description elements.  However, that is not necessary, and if it is done, the scope of the query should be limited to the broader element(s) being queried and the content of the Description elements should be displayed even if does not contain the queried term.

The logic will be more more complicated if two or more of the elements are queried at once.  Perhaps the screen screen shot you forwarded is an example of that.  While the impression conveyed is that it shows results only from the Goal/Objective elements, perhaps that's not the case.

This file confirms that thought: https://stratml.us/carmel/iso/C3wStyle.xml  Although it contains two references to "education," neither is in a Goal or Objective Name or Description.

Glad to see that you're making progress.  No doubt, there will be many issues like this to be resolved.

Owen Ambur

https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur/

On Monday, November 21, 2022 at 11:22:32 AM EST, Naval Sarda <nsa...@epicomm.net> wrote:

Hi Owen,

While testing query service, we came across a query as attached. Please review