Change Details

O4 KR 1 As a PM, I'd like to know our coverage in the below languages of abstracts, infoboxes and sections. User Story: “As a PM, I to finish the Data Coverage document where the scope, methods and outcomes of coverage are defined for MR, so that we have a documented understanding of what has been done and can gather insights on how we could build up a larger testing and confidence framework.” **Acceptance criteria** [] Data coverage outputs documented for [ ] Abstracts [ ] Sections [ ] Infoboxes The document must have the following sections: [] A Description of how we get our sample sets, where we got them from (What dataset was used to determine the outcomes?) [] A Description of the tools and what was used to test [] An explanation of what the confusion matrix sees as FN, FP, TN, TP and what the caveats are [] A confusion matrix for Infoboxes, Sections and Abstracts, including brief analysis to accomodate the numbers [] Document must have all pending comments in Data Coverage document made until Feb 28th marked as resolved ===== Things to consider: ===== 1. If devs find along the way unknowns, or outstanding questions on how the task should be tackled, they must log them in the decision log and consult with the team the best path to move forward before implementing any changes. Product has agreed to reduce velocity until outstanding questions and unknowns are resolved. 2. This is a parent task and will be broken down in smaller chunks of work or subtasks 3. Redoing past work is a risk that product has accepted (The risk cannot be resolved, so it must be accepted as-is and dealt with as necessary) 4. Log findings, so that they can be triaged either as known issues or as needed fixes (which will need phab tickets and be prioritized)

O4 KR 1 As a PM, I'd like to know our coverage in the below languages of abstracts, infoboxes and sections. User Story: “As a PM, I to finish the Data Coverage document where the scope, methods and outcomes of coverage are defined for MR, so that we have a documented understanding of what has been done and can gather insights on how we could build up a larger testing and confidence framework.” **Acceptance criteria** [] Data coverage outputs documented for [ ] Abstracts [ ] Sections [ ] Infoboxes The document must have the following sections: [] A Description of how we get our sample sets, where we got them from (What dataset was used to determine the outcomes?) [] A Description of the tools and what was used to test [] An explanation of what the confusion matrix sees as FN, FP, TN, TP and what the caveats are -- to decide if they make sense for all features [] A confusion matrix for Infoboxes, Sections and Abstracts, including brief analysis to accomodate the numbers [] Document must have all pending comments in Data Coverage document made until Feb 28th marked as resolved ===== Things to consider: ===== 1. If devs find along the way unknowns, or outstanding questions on how the task should be tackled, they must log them in the decision log and consult with the team the best path to move forward before implementing any changes. Product has agreed to reduce velocity until outstanding questions and unknowns are resolved. 2. This is a parent task and will be broken down in smaller chunks of work or subtasks 3. Redoing past work is a risk that product has accepted (The risk cannot be resolved, so it must be accepted as-is and dealt with as necessary) 4. Log findings, so that they can be triaged either as known issues or as needed fixes (which will need phab tickets and be prioritized)

O4 KR 1 As a PM, I'd like to know our coverage in the below languages of abstracts, infoboxes and sections. User Story: “As a PM, I to finish the Data Coverage document where the scope, methods and outcomes of coverage are defined for MR, so that we have a documented understanding of what has been done and can gather insights on how we could build up a larger testing and confidence framework.” **Acceptance criteria** [] Data coverage outputs documented for [ ] Abstracts [ ] Sections [ ] Infoboxes The document must have the following sections: [] A Description of how we get our sample sets, where we got them from (What dataset was used to determine the outcomes?) [] A Description of the tools and what was used to test [] An explanation of what the confusion matrix sees as FN, FP, TN, TP and what the caveats are -- to decide if they make sense for all features [] A confusion matrix for Infoboxes, Sections and Abstracts, including brief analysis to accomodate the numbers [] Document must have all pending comments in Data Coverage document made until Feb 28th marked as resolved ===== Things to consider: ===== 1. If devs find along the way unknowns, or outstanding questions on how the task should be tackled, they must log them in the decision log and consult with the team the best path to move forward before implementing any changes. Product has agreed to reduce velocity until outstanding questions and unknowns are resolved. 2. This is a parent task and will be broken down in smaller chunks of work or subtasks 3. Redoing past work is a risk that product has accepted (The risk cannot be resolved, so it must be accepted as-is and dealt with as necessary) 4. Log findings, so that they can be triaged either as known issues or as needed fixes (which will need phab tickets and be prioritized)