Vocabulary Discussion Summary

From Government Linked Data (GLD) Working Group Wiki
Revision as of 11:48, 1 March 2012 by Phila (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Standard Vocabularies for Government Linked Data

See Also

Vocabulary Selection Quality Checklist

Org Vocabulary

RFD Data Cube Vocabulary

ISA Core Vocabulary Combined Conceptual Model

Richard's summary at F2F2

DCAT Editor's Draft

Former work by eGov IG

Vocabulary 1: Metadata

This vocabulary must be suitable for:

  • provenance (in coordination with the W3C Provenance Interchange Working Group)
  • data catalogs (see the dcat data catalog vocabulary and the Comprehensive Knowledge Archive Network CKAN, and VoiD)
  • data quality
  • timeliness of data, status, refresh rate, etc

The Library Linked Data Incubator Group reports offer some use cases and possible technical inputs.

Proposals:

NB: Per cygri, a short report has been prepared (Sept 2011), TTL file with extensions (not published), current activity is email discussions on how to proceed. Some preliminary info includes ISO Extensions to SKOS

Vocabulary 2: Statistical “Cube” Data

The group will produce a vocabulary, compatible with SDMX, for expressing some kinds of statistical data. This need not be as expressive as all of SDMX, but may provide a subset as in the RDF Data Cube vocabulary. It may also include ways to annotate data to indicate its assumptions and comparability.

Proposals etc:

Vocabulary 3: People

Detailed discussion via dedicated Wiki page.

Vocabulary 4: Organizational Structures

Such as the Epimorphics the Organization Ontology (see also its requirements document).

Proposals etc:

Vocabulary 5: Geography, Spatial Information

This vocabulary is optional.

Inputs include W3C Geospatial Ontologies Incubator Report, the European INSPIRE Directive, and vocabulary elements of GeoSPARQL. (See liaisons.)

Proposals etc:

Expression of Interest

The following people have expressed interested in creating or reviewing vocab info at F2F1 (June 2011):

  • Richard Cyganiak (DERI) - Statistical "cube" data, SDMX
  • Simon Wall (AU Gov't) - statistical data, geographic data, data catalogs
  • Martin Alvarez (CTIC) - especially dcat
  • Raphael Troncy (EURECOM) - statistical and geographic data
  • Benedikt Kämpgen (FZI Karlsruhe) - Statistical Data
  • Chris Musialek (US General Services Administration) - Interested in vocabs related to people.
  • Tina Gheen (National Science Foundation) - Organizational Structures
  • David G. Smith (US EPA) - Organizational Structures, Geography and Spatial Information
  • Rick Murphy (US GSA) - Semiotics for Linked Data
  • Cory Casanave (US, Model Driven Solutions) - Vocabulary Representation & Federation, also interested in people and org structures
  • John Erickson (RPI)
  • Boris Villazón-Terrazas (UPM) (Geography and Spatial Information)
  • Asun Gómez-Perez (UPM) (OMV - Ontology Metadata Vocabulary)
  • Dan Gillman (US BLS) [1] - Statistical data and metadata, SDMX, DDI, US Open Government Vocabularies
  • Bart van Leeuwen

Discussed:

  • Dan Gilman chairing US Government Open Vocabularies Interest Group.
    • Concern: The OGV whitepaper Dan referenced doesn't make a direct contribution to the WG deliverables.

Charter

The vocabularies that the group is tasked to deliver are listed in Section 2.3 of the GLD Charter. Some considerations mentioned in the charter:

  • group has to decide whether to reuse existing terms such as foaf:name and dc:temporal, or mint new URIs in a w3.org name space
  • if the group decides to mint new URIs, it should link them to equivalent concepts
  • decisions will be closely related to the Best Practice advice on Vocabulary Selection deliverable
  • group will gather and publish use cases and requirements for each vocabulary
  • group will produce W3C Recommendation(s) defining the meaning and usage of each element in these vocabularies (where they are not already defined in suitable open standards)
  • group will also produce documentation and examples
  • optionally, group will produce test cases and OWL ontologies for these vocabularies


Not in charter: Event information

Vocabulary to descibes events in place time perspective, e.g. when / where / who new legislation is put in place