Deciding what information is shown versus specified for the construction and maintenance of semantic space needs to be coordinated. An example of similar coordination between specifications and drawings is below from the Construction Specification Institute Project Resource Manual 22.214.171.124. The first line lists potential errors and omissions in construction documents for buildings, the second offers a comparison to the design and construction of semantic space.
Leaving out important instructions or data sources that should be included.
Overlaps and duplications between disciplines:
The data curator, writer, image maker, systems engineer and others should not duplicate work.
Noncompliance with laws and regulations:
Outside of copyright, exactly which laws and regulations are the semantic world subject to? Standards developed by W3 or ISO may be looser or tighter than standards needed within a particular area of expertise.
Conflicts and discrepancies with locations of equipment and components:
Where are the computational and display devices being used?
Incompatible materials and components:
Can’t play this video on that monitor, the composer of a piece of music prefers it not to be played over a low quality cell phone speaker – both should be equally incompatible.
Difficult or impossible construction methods:
The information actually has to transmit and be classifiable.
Inconsistent terminology and abbreviations:
Particularly for search, inconsistencies compromise results. Inconsistent and inappropriate terminology is perpetuated by such poor practices as the indiscriminate reuse of details and poorly edited specifications from previous projects. Today there is not enough tracing and quality control over sources being used, in the future such quality control needs to extend to reuse also.
Inconsistent units of measure:
Today, units of measure are treated like text rather than actual values to find and utilize information by others.
Incorrect or unspecified materials, components, or equipment:
Not stating optimal display or computational devices.
Errors in extent of alternates:
Where are ideas and information interchangeable, where can substitutions be used?
Errors in defining areas of construction phasing:
Every system is built and implemented step by step, what are the appropriate phases to develop a semantic space for a particular use? How is this shown? What can be specified from lessons learned?
Errors in defining limits of work:
Most digital collections specialize in an area. Their presence should be stronger there with a weaker presence in areas that are simply related.
Errors in identifying work by the Owner or work not in contract:
Not every semantic space contains every digital material, not all spaces and materials are new or the responsability of tomorrow’s semantic contractors. What exactly states their scope of work? What can be shown in a universally shared diagram versus specified in a project specific requirements document?
Errors in designating work of separate contracts:
Where are the dividing lines between curator, specification writer, image? or map maker, registrar, network designer, owner, and review boards. What feedback mechanisms are in place for the entire cycle of work of separate contracts?
Inaccurate or unnecessary cross-referencing:
Extremely long lists of links, redundancy in any form, and any search results over 3 pages.
To avoid errors and omissions in construction documents for semantic space, what checklists can be used to be sure all items are covered and there are no discrepancies or overlaps between scope?
Shouldn’t information drawings be like construction drawings using only generic terms and symbols? Does it matter if end users cannot read the symbols the same way most building owners cannot read plans?
Once the semantic design documents are finalized and before the work (such as a library digitization project) is completed a responsible semantic design team needs to:
Verify that all previously noted inconsistencies, errors, and inaccuracies have been corrected.
Verify that the construction documents are complete, with final check of specification contents and list of required model views.
Verify consistency of all schedules between the specifications and drawings. The schedule could be the tabular data underlying the map, most of the work is done in this view before the map is generated.