Attendees: Jay, Larry, Achim, Oliver. Thérèse
The Discovery view is a bit confusing at the moment. There is a view called Discovery and there are also two package - Discovery and New Objects for Discovery. It seems like 3 disjointed chunks. What should there be? The view can only reference objects that are already existing (because all it gives you when editing is a checklist of all existing objects. So for the moment there should be a view called Discovery and one package called Discovery. The Discovery view may reference objects which are in packages other than the Discovery package (for example conceptual objects).
This raised an issue about how we are relating to other standards. Should we externalise the mapping to other objects or do the mapping within our model. We could add a column in Drupal to note things like "mappable to Foaf: person". We should write a proposal for how to handle this.
There is a great deal of cross over in the objects. Lary will start to clean up discovery
Action: Oliver and Achim to make a proposal about the related standards
Action: Larry will start to work on the discovery view.
Action items from last meeting
Attendees: Jay, Arofan, Larry, Oliver, Wendy, Jon, Marcel, Thérèse
Oliver looked at the Agent package in Drupal. He noticed that there was a pattern in what was modelled. Entities with properties that may change over time had been externalised to a property container (example was Individual Name Type). This container can be changed over time. The other approach is to collapse everything into the main object (Example: Individual). It was pointed out that there is a design principle that states that we only model "real" things. A decision was taken to simplify/collapse the objects in the Agent package.
Action: Arofan will go through the Agent package and clean it up.
The Service object is a duplication of the Machine object in the Agent package. The Service object should be removed and the relationship made to the Machine object.
Some of the relationships are expressed in past tense. These should be changed to present tense
It was agreed that the objects in the Process package should only support a simple process. There are a number of objects that relate to the paralell processing use case (example: Split, Split/Join). These should be moved to a separate package called (for the moment) "Complex Process". A paper should be written that shows how to describe processes in other views. Arofan will write it, with input from Jay. Steve McE would also be a good person to be involved. Larry is interested in reviewing the paper.
Action: Remove Service object and fix relationships to Machine
Action: Fix verb tense in relationships
Action: Create "Complex Process" package and move objects that are not part of the simple - Jay
Action: Arofan to lead the writing on the paper on process.
There is a problem having an object called "Node". It breaks the graphs in Drupal. It was agreed to rename the object "Nodec" until a more permenant solution can be found.
There are some issues with the alignment of the DDI 4 modelling and GSIM. There is sometimes a conflict between GSIM and the way it works in DDI 3.2 now. A decision has to be made in each of these instances as to why there is a difference (wither from GSIM or DDI). We need people to go through and carefully check each object.
There is a conceptual variable and a represented variable, but we could not see where the instance variable is. It looks like it belongs to another team (Simple Data Description). Oliver will have a look at what is going on.
There was a question about the Universe, Population and Units objects. We need to make sure that we get these basic objects right. A discussion should be had with people like Arofan, Wendy, Jay, Dan G and Jenny Linnerud. Jenny had some problems implementing these objects from GSIM so may have some useful info to add to the discussion. Wendy will write something to frame the discussion.
Action: Rename Node in Drupal - Jon
Action: Ask Classifications team to help with GSIM mapping work.
Action: Oliver will have a look at the variable objects.
Action: Wendy to frame discussion on universe, population etc.
Attendees: Jay, Larry, Jannik, Johan, Oliver, Wendy Jon, Thérèse
The Agent, Process, Conceptual parts of the library and the discovery view were created in Drupal during the Toronto sprint. They are now ready to be reviewed by the modelling team. There are notes on the wiki which should help you to know what needs to be checked in Drupal and what conventions have been agreed (see: Drupal Conventions). Wendy will review this document to make sure that it is up to date and correct.
The review works was allocated out as follows:
- Agent = Oliver
- Process = Jannik
- Conceptual = Jay
- Discovery = Larry
Jon will look at everything from a documentation rather than modelling perspective. Johan will go on holiday
The group agreed to meeting in 2 - 3 weeks to discuss results of the reviewing work.
DDI TC Meeting
In Attendance: Wendy Thomas (organizer), Johan Fihn, Dan Gillman, Jay Greenfield, Jeremy Iverson, Jon Johnson, Dan Smith
Secretary: Elise Dunham
TC used this meeting time to advance work commitments to the DDI 4 Moving Forward Project
Name, Label, Description
Containment and Reference/What do we reference?*
*TC decided to begin referring to the Containment and Reference portion of their work as "What do we reference?" at the 2014-06-12 meeting.
Dan Gillman: Write up a document about his ideas on approaching the name, label, description issue in a rigorous manner
All: Review and send in feedback on GSIM 1.1 to DDI 3.2 mapping document
Name, Label, Description
Frame of discussion/background: in previous versions of DDI, we've used ISO/IEC 11179-5 as the basis for our approach. This included a set of 3 objects: Name, Label, and Description. For Name we used a NameType, with each object having a specific name of type="NameType" (i.e. VariableName, ConceptName, etc.) We've made the decision to just use Name as a direct property of the object. Questions are:
- What objects should we be using this with?
- Is the full triple always required?
Dan Gillman would like to see us put more structure around names, concepts, labels, and designations. He will write up a document where he'll lay out his ideas on this issue to give a sense of what the distinctions are and how to structure them. Aiming for early next week; send any questions to Dan in the meantime. The group consents to this plan and will use this document when making its proposal to the modeler group.
Dan Smith wrote up a document on this issue and discussed each section of it with the group. Highlights from this discussion:
- Group agrees on requirements Dan outlined in this document
- Character restrictions: in 4 we will lift character restrictions to allow for support of localized identification schemas. The historical reason for character restrictions is now managed by the ability to capture a DDI lifecycle URN in 2.5: identifiers in 4 will still be able to be represented in Codebook.
- When we get back to working on administrative metadata we need to pay attention to potential overloading.
- XML serialization and RDF serialization: Dan has outlined 2 potential strategies for doing this, and says it could be done with either approach or a combination of them. The group responsible for determining the approach are the groups doing the transformations.
- Dan's document is ready to be presented; it's meant to describe the how's, not the what's—that's for the modelers; the how and the application are intentionally being treated as two separate functions in this workflow.
Containment and Reference/What do we reference?
- Will discuss fully in another meeting.
- Changed what we refer to this discussion as to "What do we reference?"
Other TC Business
Dan Smith put out a call on the DDI-user list that starts the mapping of the GSIM 1.1 to DDI 3.2. He asks that everyone look that over and send in any comments. If there's feedback, Wendy will put on the agenda for next week's TC meeting.
Plans for Next Week
Back to TC 3.2 work: Sampling, weighting and questionnaire development.