[User Story]: Link evidence to external source

[chrisdburr]

Role

As a User

Desired Feature

I want to add an external source (from a list of relevant sources, e.g. standards) to a piece of evidence.

Benefit

So that it is easier than typing in manually, and others can see shared sources of evidence.

Acceptance Criteria

GIVEN I am creating a piece of evidence OR I have created a piece of evidence WHEN I have the edit evidence pane open THEN I am able to select from a set of drop-down lists that provide me with options for relevant documents, such as standards AND Selecting one of the options links my evidence to relevant metadata (e.g. DOI, URL) OR If no pre-defined option is available, then I can manually add relevant metadata (e.g. DOI, URL)

Dependencies

• [ ] Integration with relevant APIs (e.g. AI Standards Hub) or datasets (e.g. IEEE, SCOPUS)
• [ ] Schema supports additional metadata (e.g. DOI, URL)

Technical Notes

No response

Definition of Done

• [ ] The feature fulfills all acceptance criteria.
• [ ] The code is reviewed and meets team coding standards.
• [ ] All unit, integration, and end-to-end tests are passed.
• [ ] The feature meets accessibility standards set for the project.
• [ ] The code passes the CI/CD pipeline quality controls (style and linting).
• [ ] The feature is merged into the main branch.
• [ ] The feature is deployed and functional in the QA environment.
• [ ] The feature was demonstrated to the team and accepted by the product owner.

[chrisdburr]

@kallewesterling, please can you assess this user story and make sure its clear.

[kallewesterling]

@chrisdburr This looks like it might need a little bit more of technical scoping. I'm thinking, specifically, about a big question mark for me: What should be in the dropdown? Should it be universally implemented (i.e. hard-coded) or something the user can have some kind of control over? Is it domain-dependent (i.e. if someone is working on digital twinning, we want a certain set of dropdown alternatives, but if someone is working on engineering more broadly, we want others?)

[chrisdburr]

In the future, I want the platform to be as extensible as possible (e.g. community plugins or customisations).

This strikes me as a case where we want to offer some core options (e.g. links to AI Standards Hub for standards), but also ensure there is a clear way for organisations to attach to their own sources (e.g. knowledge bases, governance documents).

So, in short, yes this needs more scoping.

[JimCircadian]

Hello. The Evidence URL added can't be seen when adding the evidence to a claim, only afterwards when you edit it. 😉

[chrisdburr]

Thanks, @JimCircadian. Added a new issue #500 to address this.

[chrisdburr]

Closing, as new issue created and need to revisit design specifications for further investigation.