Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
51 In Chapters 1 through 6, the NCHRP Project 20-109 research team laid out the project plan and research approach, provided historical background to place the current TRT in context, and summarized the analysis and findings for each dimension of the assessment. The team provided five use cases as context for understanding the impacts of the assessment findings for the strate- gic future and longer term development of the TRT. In this chapter, the research team offers conclusions founded on the detailed data collection and criteria level assessments, the findings from that data, and the teamâs understanding of pos- sible futures for the TRT. Conclusion 1 The research team proposes that the TRTâs future value as an information management tool with application beyond indexing of TRID depends fundamentally on achieving Use Case 1. Unless this transformation is accomplished, there is no future scenario for the thesaurus beyond its current state. The TRT may not be able to compete with other knowledge organi- zation systems that may become available on the open source or commercial markets. Transfor- mation to an ISO-compliant thesaurus and thesaurus management application is achievable in Phase 2 of NCHRP Project 20-109. Conclusion 2 As a result of the TMS assessment against criteria and comparison of additional context from the use cases, the research team offers these general conclusions regarding the selection of a TMS: ⢠Final decisions about the appropriate TMS are closely linked to the strategic decisions regarding the future of the TRT, as represented by the use cases. ⢠If Use Case 1, the ISO-compliant TRT, is the desired approach, the next step is to review the optional requirements to determine which ones the project panel, the TRT Subcommittee, and TRT staff consider to be mandatory. ⢠Even if the initial focus is on Use Case 1, the TMS selection can be made with an eye to the more advanced use case scenarios since Use Case 1 requirements are met by the majority of the TMS products on the working list. ⢠Non-functional factors such as initial and recurring costs, technical platform, staffing, licensing, usability, and training will be major factors in the final decision process and are closely tied to the roadmap that will be developed following the in-person meeting with the project panel. C h a p t e r 7 Conclusions
52 the transportation research thesaurus: Capabilities and enhancements ⢠If the decision is to move more in the strategic direction represented by Use Cases 2 through 4, it will be important to identify additional requirements to support the required functionality. Each forward-looking use case brings additional requirements or modifications to current requirements as well as new opportunities for the TRT. Conclusion 3 If an investment in Use Case 0 (the status quo) is the only possible option, the research team suggests that TRB and the transportation community limit the investment to tasks that will contribute to interoperability and correction of non-standard practices. Conclusion 4 Engage the transportation community, in particular state DOTs, research institutes, univer- sity technology centers, and transportation libraries in drafting a long-term strategy based on a consensus across the field. This can be included as a Phase 2 task for this project (NCHRP Project 20-109).
