To Dos follow ups | - Next meetings:
- 19th May presentation of the gathered feedback/updated proposal and tools to the PC
- Questions:
Notes: - PC-Presentation:
- inform the PC on our progress on evaluating possible tools to organize the ranking process better
- present all the different ways to rank the features
- Have aSIG Ranking and an institutional Ranking on the same features/same list in an integrated way
- We have to watch out for features that are not dedicated to one special SIG so these do not go missing
- One Option could also be to send out a survey once a year to include the hole community
- weighing needs to be decided: consortias, implemented institutions will have more weight here
- In addition: a separate product focused survey by the PC to find out general needs or faults of the system (every 6 month)
- including which functional areas are most important
- should be one survey per area/SIG
- Communication on the survey and ranking process should be broad, so that it includes everyone
- how often is ranking needed or is it an ongoing process?
- have the institutions and SIGs rank on different dates/cycles to clearly separate them
- Give institutions the chance to just step back from the latest ranking (taking the ranking from last cycle)
- Missing from last pointing process: ranking something not relevant!
- A ranking R1-R5 vs a prioritised list of all features - combining them could be a way?
|