Background

...

• reject a UC
• add the UC to their backlog
• indicate that the UC is already supported and show how the specification is used to deliver the UC.

But it is expected that the WG's will at least update the UC WG Confluence page with their decision and a brief 'reason'.

Initially please engage with this proposal either by comments or by creating an alternative set of guidelines and referencing them in a comment on this page.

The Guidelines

In considering a use case, this guidelines proposes that there are two separate questions to answer:

...

• Is it real UC for FDC3 participants?
• Does it apply to areas of concern for FDC3?
• Is it not a repeat of another UC?

FDC3 Participant

Within this document an FDC3 Participant is defined as someone working with :

• A Member of the FDC3
• Financial industry firm.
  
  
• Product Vendor supplying end-user Platforms or Applications to the Financial Industry.
  Here I am thinking of companies like TR and ChartIQ.
  Their applications will typically be run at multiple companies, all of whom are running the same code. 
  
  
• Platform Vendor supplying products or services to developers producing end-user Products/Applications.
  Here I am thinking of companies like OpenFin, Glue42 and Plexus (even though DB also provide end-user applications).
  These products are often not visible to the User but they can are used to make the production of FDC3 compliant applications easier.
  

Valid Persona are used to introduce a use case, typically using the words 'As a <persona> ...'. Valid Persona for FDC3 UC's:

...