Outcomes of the test phase Stephan Hofmann Manuela Pfeiffer Bund/Länder-Arbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser WG DIS 13./14.10.2015 in Brussels

Outcomes of the test phase – Reporting Guidance well done: improvements in terms of linguistic and consistency in Guidance Paper  higher level of maturity in comparison with „final reporting tools“ for previous reporting exercises This allowed to adjust national rules for data transfers or transformation in terms of updated codes from our „old“ datamodel into a new datamodel and update of national papers (guidance documents, background documents)

Outcomes of the test phase – Reporting Guidance things which don't worked well - from User perspective or causing problems in terms of communication with other colleages, especially data providers on regional level (German Länder) : Revision of Version 6.0 without Change Log over weeks (redundant feedbacks to WFD Helpdesk, uncertainties about volume of changes) Delays in timetable without prior announcements have consequences for national and regional meetings, contracts etc. Lack of „up to date“ timetable is critical at this stage (timetable should be updated in case of delays) Different dates/time stamps/versions in terms of latest draft lead to confusion

Screenshot: 08/10/2015

Outcomes of the test phase – Schemas well done: Very good from technical perpective: flat schemas simplify analysis but this leads sometimes to an extreme normalisation in terms of translating schemas into Access-Database, therefore mapping data into Access-Database is very extensive/time consuming (as already mentioned by AT and Nery the number of tables exploded)   

Outcomes of the test phase – Schemas  „Room for improvement“: - Actual use of sequences in schemata forces specific order which is by now not in line with content order or logical order. Constraints (for example „Conditional check“ and „Cross-schema check“ are not part of schema elements but „documentation elements“. Due to this information is not structured in a homogenous way

Outcomes of the test phase – Schemas „well-meant“ but not helpful modifications after publishing „final draft version“:  names of Schema Elements should not change on last meters if changes are solely „cosmetic“, like deleting one „s“ to have singular form instead of plural In conjunction with this it should be considered that late changes cause much more effort in comparison with changes at an earlier point of time, especially when data are collected from different data providers or in a federal structure

Outcomes of the test phase – Schemas DE or BfG finished work on updated WasserBLIcK-data model and Länder start to work with it in Germany there are more than only 16 different data providers and a lot of them use support from consultants to set up data export routines into WasserBLIcK-data model etc. Therefore further modifications should be limited to really important and essential ones like changes in terms of „obligation“

Outcomes of the test phase – Tools well done: Overview illustration with order; UML-model Every request/feedback to WFD Helpdesk was answered things which don't worked well: Tools for XML quality checks should have been published earlier Inbetween WFD Helpdesk-Log was not updated in sufficient frequency No key words for WFD Helpdesk-Log entries (ticket numbers are not as helpful as key words), due to this it‘s not easy to find feedback form other MS or COM to same issue

Thanks!