 Ok, let's talk about latex. How many of you have actually started using latex? Can you raise your hands? Almost all of them. So have you completed the exercise which Firuza had given? How many of you have completed that exercise? Where the content were given? A soft copy I believe they are loaded on the moodle and the expected output in latex was given. So how many of you have been able to convert the content into that format or close to that? Nobody has tried. So when you say you have started using latex means what exactly? You have learned the spelling of the word latex and have you downloaded text to do on your machines? Sorry? Akail, that's fine. Ok. How many of you have written at least a two page article in latex? Can you raise your hand? A large number. Then doing this exercise that was given by Firuza should be child's play. Or no, it is not. Or perhaps it is child's play and you are not children therefore you are not doing it. Do you want some harder exercise? Alright. How about agree that the literature survey that you are doing must be submitted in latex only? Would that be a good exercise? Obligatory learning of latex. Not very enthusiastic Norse. How many of you are anyway planning to submit your seminar report or other reports in latex? Quite a few, but not all. So for those who are anyway planning to do that this should not be a problem. So what about others? Ok. How many of you are not planning to use latex for your seminar report? Let us find that out. No one. Ok. So let me in conclusion say most of you are familiar with latex. Some more features have been discussed by both Prasad Kalan and Firuza here. So if there was any small doubt in your mind it would have been clarified now. That means I can take it that all of you are experts in using latex. Right? Good. So today we shall have a quiz which will require you to write the overall functional specifications of a crowdsourcing approach that I briefly mentioned earlier. So first we will write it in plain English, not necessarily the entire gamut, but a particular subtopic of that area. And then you will rewrite the same thing in latex. You don't have Kyle, you don't have any assistance, you have paper and pencil. Everybody has paper and pencil. So some four page supplements are being distributed. Religiously write your roll number on the top right corner and today's day this will also serve as attendance which is remarkably thin today. Let me highlight some points which I made. Let me recapitulate what is the intention. Incidentally now that activity is part of a funded project not by Ministry of HRD but by Ministry of Culture where they wish to create a national virtual library of all cultural assets of the country. This is a joint project that will be done with CDAC, with National Knowledge Network and with IGNU and Raja Ram Mohan Rai Library Foundation of Kolkata and IIT Bombay of course. So our path is to create a culturally aware nation that is able to be digitally empowered to actually look at the site, search whatever they wish to and study more about the Indian culture. B should be able to contribute, C should be able to review some of the contributions and D should be able to come up to lead such large collaborative communities in different fields. I have already mentioned that we wanted to do that for the higher education field but now we are getting funding to build the same software for the larger purpose. Obviously we will use the same software for our purposes as well. So coming back to the exercise today, building and nurturing collaborating communities is the title of what we wish to build, the software for doing this. There are multiple facets to it. I have briefly discussed it earlier but I will mention two important entities in this whole affair. The first and foremost one entity obviously is people because people who form the communities. The other is what people do and here we are talking about all kind of digital assets. So let us elaborate this a bit further. First we will identify the attributes that we wish to capture and store for people in the context of their contributing digital assets, reviewing digital assets, certifying digital assets etc. Also in the context of their ability to lead the collaborative groups or to be team members of the collaborative groups. Similarly we will like to write down the attributes that we wish to capture for each and every digital asset that could ever become part of the contributions made by this crowd. Or an earlier crowd for it. So to give you an example, there would be a large number of museums already existing in India. Much of the information about those museums will already be available, some of it at least in the digital form, in the form of files. But there could also be manuscripts which will have to be actually captured as pictures and stored. These pictures have to be high resolution pictures for people to study them further and so on. There could be translations of these manuscripts in some well known Indian languages. There could be animations, there could be movie clips. All kinds of digital assets therefore are feasible. We need to identify what are the different types of digital assets that we will ever be dealing with or the communities will be dealing with. Please note that when we restrict our domain of activities to only education, even then the digital assets will have exactly similar form. There could be for example video clips of lectures, there could be text material. But as an added attraction, there could be interactive quizzes, interactive tests, long assignments, all kinds of things. So education will have some peculiar features. We can consider the education domain as a subclass of the larger domain of journalism. Here when we are talking about national cultural assets, then you have to actually identify and associate with each type of digital asset what could be the cultural value associated with that digital asset. Now you have got all the papers, everybody has got a paper. So start writing the following. All odd roll numbers write about people. One, three, five, seven, nine. This is a poetic justice because people are always odd people, right? So odd numbers are perfectly fine. People with even roll numbers will expand digital assets. When I say expand, you have to write different types of assets. And for every type that you identify, you have to comment on what format you would like that asset to be stored. What are the expected sizes in terms of kilobytes, megabytes, gigabytes, terabytes, petabytes, both for an individual asset and how many such assets do you expect to be put together by this larger community? To restrict the field to something known, let us take the field of education only with which all of us are familiar. That means people we are talking about are essentially learners, but these learners could be regular students of a school or a college, research scholars, or ordinary people who are professionals but want to learn something. All young children who are not fortunate enough to go to a regular school and therefore they are not enrolled, but they wish to learn. So these are the categories of people that comes to my mind on the learning side. But there would also be facilitators of such learning such as teachers, teaching assistants, professors, and these together will form the other group of reviewers, critiques, etc., etc. So please start writing. I would expect at least an identification of 20 different categories of both people and assets. So write down these 20 each. So you have to write only 20 things. Just imagine and write. First write individually next 5 minutes or 7 minutes. No discussion at this juncture. This is like an individual test. Hey, you cannot caulk from your neighbour. Both of you have the same all or even number, is it? What's your role number? All or even? No, I am just talking about those two people, whether they are numbers or all or even, both of you. So is that the reason why you were sharing notes? Yeah, what I said is each one for next 5 minutes writes as an individual exam. No discussion, no peeping here and so on. I want you to apply your individual mind first. No, no, no, sorry. Let there be no confusion. This is not a latex exercise. This is an exercise in arriving at what we call overall functional specifications of a system that we are building. As a first step, we are trying to identify entities and their attributes of interest. These are traditional system analysis design work, right? All of you are familiar with that. But I don't want it to be written in the form of a software specification at this juncture. So towards the act of developing functional specifications, the first thing you are doing is, from the broad understanding of what we are attempting, you have to list different types of entities that may exist amongst people. Education is our field. So if someone writes dancer or singer, for example, you have to associate it with learning, dancing and learning singing or teaching, dancing and teaching singing. But I am sure you are not going into those minute details. Here we are talking about the role of people as components of such collaborating communities, which are learners or learning facilitators of different types. Anybody who has written more than 5, 1, 2, good, good. So when you reach 10, raise your hand. Oh, 10 already. My God. Lady is fast. Come on, all others. So everybody has reached the magic number 5 in terms of classification. Anybody who has got less than 5 items listed? Oh, less than 5. What happened? Can't imagine? Think of more, even if you have written several. I am distributing one more sheet per group. This is not for individuals. So write your group idea on that and now you can stop writing the previous thing and discuss individual lists amongst all group members, those who are present. Now it doesn't matter whether your role number is even or all. Read your, keep the new blank sheet that is being provided independently. Just keep it with you separately. That's all. And now, read your neighbour's list. Are there only two people in your group today? Is it? There are only two people in your group? What happened to the rest? How many are there? Totally four. So 50% present. Anyway, you two can now share, but now this is the time when you start discussing. So discuss in a bit of a low voice, but discuss amongst yourselves. As I said, it doesn't matter whether you wrote something about people and you got a paper from your neighbour who has written on digital assets. It doesn't matter. Now learn about what digital assets people could have written and comment on it. Alright, so just some quick general comments from you. Do you believe that your neighbours have identified something more that you could not think of? So there is generally a feeling that when a large group of people do some work, collectively it is generally more than what any one individual can do. That's the whole theme of building collaborative community. Now every group should work as a collaborative community. I can see that some groups have only two people and one group seems to have only one person. There's only one. Alright. So you are a group of one, unique group. Now in this separate sheet that has been provided, write your group number or group ID and write down the composite things that have been identified by all individuals of the group. If there are members of the group which have worked on people and other set of members who have worked on digital assets, make two layers. If all members of the group have written only on one of the topics, then write those. But now produce a paper which represents the collective wisdom of the group. You have exactly five minutes to prepare, well written. So do it on the last page of the sheet that you have or first page doesn't matter wherever because I am going to randomly select such group layers, two or three and project them here. So write in a reasonably large font or good font quickly, five minutes. Which groups have finished? Please raise your hand. Everybody is writing still. Okay. Anybody done yet? Two more minutes. Please write quickly. Alright. Done. Not yet completed. I thought you were just to compile whatever individuals have written or you have started thinking now collectively to add more material, is it? Okay. One can keep improving perpetually. There is no end to improvement. So call it a closure. As long as you have captured whatever was initially thought by individuals and you have put it collectively together, that is good enough. So all groups done. Any group which is still working, please raise your hand. All done. Alright. So let me start randomly picking out from groups. You are improving things. So let us see how far you have improved. One, they are writing something very long. So let me pick up whatever they have written. They are still writing. You can look at me and write. That is very good. That's okay. One, two. Okay. Let me pick up from this group. So this is group 7A. They are writing about people. So they have written categories of people. Coordinator, manager, teacher stroke professors. So what does that mean? Teacher stroke professors. Group 7A. So what does teacher stroke professor mean? Meaning the same thing. So there is no difference between a teacher and a professor. Are you sure? Then why are some people called teachers and some others are called professors? I am deliberately provoking discussion here. This is a discussion on taxonomy. And this is the most widely conducted discussion all across the world. It is extremely difficult for people to agree on the same term describing similarity. So terminology becomes a huge problem. My own understanding is teacher is a more generic name given by the human society to an institution which is charged with the responsibility of collecting, collecting, codifying, dispersing and generating knowledge. So that is an institution and that is the name of that institution is teacher. Professor is a subset of teachers who, as the name suggests, only professors. But I am not very sure of what these different things mean. Most importantly, professor in the human hierarchy is actually a position, is not necessarily a functional name alone whereas teacher is a functional name. Anyway, let's go further. Subject matter experts. Technical experts. So would you like to elaborate between the difference between the two? What do you mean by technical expert and what do you mean by subject matter expert? Such as, oh, I see. So basically sysads and programmers and subject matter experts. So mechanical, thermodynamics expert, programming expert, whatever, whatever. But they are not necessarily the sysads and the programmers type, although they could be. So here is another point. How many of you have figured out that it is entirely possible for the same unique person to fill up multiple roles at different times or at the same time? Did it occur to all of you? For example, I could be a contributor of a digital asset. I could also be a reviewer of some other type of digital asset. I could simultaneously be a leader of the group as well. Second, there is a temporal dimension to it. I am a volunteer. I am a team leader for some time. After two years, I take Nirvana. Now I go out. Some other leader comes. But if you look at the conventional database technology, when you update a record for a community saying, now this is the new leader, the old leader is permanently lost. So how will you retain this temporal information that eight months ago, till eight months ago, such and such person was leading this group is lost completely. That is how our Indian history is lost by the way. We update. Current information is what we keep. Anyway, I digress. Public relations officer. My God. In a crowd, how do you designate a public relations officer? It's an interesting taxonomy. Useful, of course. So what is the role of a public relations officer to the media? There is nobody who talks. This is a collaborative community on the web. I see. So Spokesperson. I see. Spokesperson. Okay. Then citizens and end users. They are ordinarily mortals like me, who have no role to play, but they are passive users of the system. Okay. And of course, as I said, a citizen could also be a reviewer. In fact, every reviewer, everybody else will also be a citizen. So the word citizen is perhaps not correctly used then. User is perhaps better. Just a user. All right. Professor, teacher, headmaster. Mistress. I suppose you mean headmistress, right? The word mistress has very funny connotations. Anyway. Okay. Content creator, system administrator, research scholar, video editor, technical writer, videographer, intern, scientist, writer, blogger, historians, children, engineers, architects, filmmaker, bureaucrats, teaching assistant, research assistant, web designer, sound manager. That's very interesting. What is sound manager expected to do? What do you expect sound manager to do? I'm curious. Sorry? The audio part you mean. I see. Interesting. Okay. Urban people, village people. Wow. That is very... Well, what about semi-urban? Tribals. So you see, we are confusing between a category and subcategory. And this is again a standard problem in any taxonom. Whenever you try to build a class and subclass and sub-subclass or any hierarchy, what comes as an element of hierarchy somewhere down the line can also come as an independent element of the line. Why put bureaucrats in there? He doesn't like bureaucrats. So any idea? Well, you may not like bureaucrats, but the world cannot be governed properly without the existence of bureaucrats. That may be the reason. To the extent that, for example, to do all this activity we require some funding support. Guess who provided it? The bureaucrats in Delhi. So we cannot live without them. All right. Here is a group 3B. So learners, scholars, students, researchers, teachers of other departments who want to learn something new. Teachers of other departments who want to learn something new. This is not a word of a taxonomist. This is a description. So why do you say only teachers of other departments? I think a person, any person who is supposed to know something about one discipline and wishes to know something about other discipline falls under this category. So why only teachers? Learners also would like to do that. Any individual would like to do that in fact. So if I am a professional specializing in let's say machine tools working in Larson and Tugro, and I want to learn something about zoology. So that person, he may not be a teacher, but you still classify that person like this, right? Working people, distant learners. Can you describe distant learners? I am deliberately provoking some discussion. What you probably meant as distant learner was somebody who is not participating in the conventional face-to-face learning. There is somebody who is not discussing across face-to-face. But my dear lady, when we are building collaborative communities on the web, everybody is distant. In fact, there will be only incidentally some physical collection and collaboration of people. Otherwise the collaboration is on web. So distant learner seem to be a natural category describing everybody, right? Facilitators is another group. Teaching instance, mentors, bookkeepers, librarian, educational manager, educational investors. That's an interesting category. Can you elaborate on that? No, bureaucrats are not investors. So you are talking about philanthropists or you are talking about venture capitalists who want to create a good business opportunity out of contributing to education. If that is what is meant, that is correct. It's not just the bureaucrats. Advisors, motivators, publishers, educational analysts, and then you have educational experts, inventors, okay, some more category here. Sorry, some more. Okay, good, there are some more. This is a very large list. My God. I can't even read it. I would prefer this list to be in the form of latex so that I can read it properly. But it also has learner, professionals, historians, journalists, reporters, writers, editors, artists, singers. I also mentioned dancers. You did not write that. Photographers, choreographers, archaeologists, geologists, researchers, sorry, or reviewer, okay. And then these are digital assets of various kinds. Anyway, I just wanted to emphasize one point. Professor Aute must have talked about writing functional specs for a large software requirement. I just wanted to tell you that it is not as easy as it sounds to write functional specs. In fact, in order to write functional specs, to identify entities which will participate in the proposed system and their roles or the use cases is not easy to identify. It's much easier to read a software engineering book and understand the case studies that have been presented. But synthesis or design is a harder problem. And the reason why we are getting so many disparate opinions on taxonomy and sometimes confusing entities and sometimes the same entity appearing in different form. This is happening because none of us have done a lot of work in attempting to do such synthesis again and again. Whereas in analysis, all of us are good. But synthesis we are not. So this is the take away from this particular session that we need to practice synthesizing things, creating things and then analyzing what we have created to see whether there is any duplication, whether there is any inadvertent inclusion of a name which should actually appear as a subcategory rather than a category. These are some of the issues in just identification of entities who have not yet come to the level of describing what information about every entity you would like to keep, which is the next step. In general, software design is a much harder problem than writing programs. And that is what I wanted to communicate through Professor Aute's class. That is what indirectly I am communicating now. What I will do is I will collect all the individual submissions as you go out. Please give your papers here. We will have one more session elaborating further on this where I will upload a sample functional, overall functional specification of the system that we are preparing. Now you can analyze it in the context of what submissions you have made and then we will talk more about how to communicate those functional specifications more elaborately. So there is nothing to do with latex, by the way. But I would expect you to complete your latex assignment. Hiruja has given some deadline. I don't think you need to wait till that deadline. You should finish it fast. Secondly, I hope your literature survey work is going on as expected because that you will have to submit and make a presentation. Alright. We will meet next week. Thank you.