| Table of Contents | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
...
RDF namespace: http://rdf-vocabulary.ddialliance.org/xkos#
XKOS documentation: http://rdf-vocabulary.ddialliance.org/xkos.html
RDF Turtle file: https://rdf-vocabulary.ddialliance.org/xkos.ttl
...
RDF Profile (CVS<>RDF<>DDI-L)
Based on analysis on 07/01/2022 of content under:
https://vocabularies.cessda.eu/vocabulary/AggregationMethod?lang=en
...
Sort#
...
CVS UI Label
...
Example value in CVS
...
CVS SKOS Class
...
CVS RDF Property
...
@lang attribute
...
DDI-L Xpath
...
DDI Mapping Comments
...
1
...
[Main] CV name
...
Aggregation Method
...
ConceptScheme
...
dcterms:title
...
Yes
...
To extract from:
https://ddialliance.org/Specification/DDI-Lifecycle/3.2/XMLSchema/logicalproduct.xsd
...
...
2
...
[Main]: CV short name
...
AggregationMethod
...
ConceptScheme
...
skos:notation
...
No
...
...
...
3
...
[Main]: CV description
...
dentifies the type of aggregation used to combine related categories, usually within a common branch of a hierarchy, to provide information at a broader level than the level at which detailed observations are taken. (From: The OECD Glossary of Statistical Terms)
...
ConceptScheme
...
dcterms:description
...
Yes
...
...
...
4
...
[Main]: CV notes
...
This vocabulary was first published by the DDI Alliance. Please see: https://ddialliance.org/controlled-vocabularies/all .
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output
...
n/a
...
...
...
5
...
[Main]: Language
...
English (en)
...
ConceptScheme
...
Mapped to Multiple properties
...
n/a
...
...
...
6
...
[Main]: Version
...
1.1
...
ConceptScheme
...
owl:VersionInfo
...
No
...
...
...
7
...
[Main]: Date of publication
...
2019-11-25
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
8
...
NOT REPRESENTED IN UI
...
n/a
outputted in SKOS as
https://ddialliance.org/Specification/DDI-CV/AggregationMethod_1.1.html#PercentileRank
as an example
...
Concept
...
Concept URI
...
n/a
...
...
...
9
...
[Details]: Code value
...
PercentileRank
...
Concept
...
skos:notation
...
No
...
...
...
10
...
[Details]: Code descriptive term
...
Percentile rank
...
Concept
...
skos:prefLabel
...
Yes
...
...
...
11
...
[Details]: Code definition
...
The percentile rank of a item is the percentage of items in its frequency distribution which are lower [cannot reach 100%].
...
Concept
...
skos:definition
...
Yes
...
...
...
12
...
[Versions]: Version notes
...
ArithmeticMean, CumulativePercent, PercentileRank: Descriptive term capitalization changed to make them conform to the other vocabularies. 2. Count, Mode: Period added at the end of the code definitions to make them conform to the other vocabularies.
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
13
...
[Versions]: Version changes
...
Code descriptive term rephrased: Arithmetic Mean rephrased into Arithmetic mean
Code descriptive term rephrased: Cumulative Percent rephrased into Cumulative percent
Code descriptive term rephrased: Percentile Rank rephrased into Percentile rank
Code definition rephrased: Count
Code definition rephrased: Mode
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
14
...
[Identity and general]: Canonical URI
...
urn:ddi:int.ddi.cv:AggregationMethod:1.1
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
15
...
[Identity and general]: Canonical Agency
...
DDI Alliance
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
16
...
[Usage]: DDI-L 3.3 Module name
...
reusable
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
17
...
[Usage]: DDI-L 3.3 Element name
...
AggregationMethod /
https://ddialliance.org/Specification/DDI-Lifecycle/3.3/XMLSchema/FieldLevelDocumentation/schemas/reusable_xsd/elements/AggregationMethod.html
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
18
...
[Usage]: DDI-L 3.2 Module name
...
reusable
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
19
...
[Usage]: DDI-L 3.2 Element name
...
AggregationMethod /
http://www.ddialliance.org/Specification/DDI-Lifecycle/3.2/XMLSchema/FieldLevelDocumentation/schemas/reusable_xsd/elements/AggregationMethod.html
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
20
...
[Usage]: DDI-L 2.5 Element/attribute name
...
var@otherAggrMeth
http://www.ddialliance.org/Specification/DDI-Codebook/2.5/XMLSchema/field_level_documentation_files/schemas/codebook_xsd/elements/var.html
...
ConceptScheme
...
Not currently output to SKOS
...
n/a
...
...
...
21
...
[Licence and citation]: Copyright © DDI Alliance 2019
...
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International - CC BY.
...
ConceptScheme
...
dcterms:license
...
Yes
...
...
...
22
...
[Licence and citation]: Citation
...
DDI Alliance. (2019). Aggregation Method (Version 1.1) [Controlled vocabulary]. CESSDA. urn:ddi:int.ddi.cv:AggregationMethod:1.1.
...
ConceptScheme
...
dcterms:rights
...
Yes
...
...
...
23
...
[Licence and citation]: Available from
...
ConceptScheme
...
ConceptScheme URI
...
n/a
...
...
...
24
...
NOT REPRESENTED IN UI
...
n/a
outputted in SKOS as
https://ddialliance.org/Specification/DDI-CV/AggregationMethod
as an example
...
ConceptScheme
...
dcterms:isVersionOf
...
n/a
...
...
...
25
...
NOT REPRESENTED IN UI
...
n/a
Hierarchy is implied by concatenation of concept chain from root e.g.
Family.HouseholdFamily code value sits under Family in https://vocabularies.cessda.eu/vocabulary/AnalysisUnit?lang=en
...
Concept
...
skos:narrower
NB - skos:broader not used explicitly in CVS SKOS output
...
n/a
...
26
...
NOT REPRESENTED IN UI
...
n/a
...
ConceptScheme
...
skos:hasTopConcept
...
n/a
...
27
...
NOT REPRESENTED IN UI
...
n/a
...
Concept
...
skos:inScheme
...
n/a
...
28
...
NOT CURRENTLY REPRESENTED
DDI ELEMENT/XPATH
REQUIREMENT FROM TC MEETING 03-MAR-2022 TO SPECIFY WHICH DDI ELEMENT THE CV IS USED FOR. THIS WILL ULTIMATELY ENABLE FIELD LEVEL DOCUMENTATION TO AUTOMATICALLY SPECIFY THE CV USED FOR A PARTICULAR ELEMENT
...
n/a
...
ConceptScheme
...
TO BE DETERMINED
...
| View file | ||
|---|---|---|
|
Governance
Follow up on Snapshot: Concerns relating to the governance of FAIR vocabularies
...
| Expand | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||
|
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
From: Taina Jääskeläinen (TAU) [mailto:taina.jaaskelainen@tuni.fi]
Hi Darren, go to this web page and click to open the section +Versioning policy https://ddialliance.org/controlled-vocabularies
This applies to source vocabularies which have two-digit version number. i.e. minor and major changes. The translated vocabularies have a three-digit version number where the first two digits are the source version number (telling the translation of which source version it is), and the third is just a running number indicating any change. So 3.4.2 version in a translation version means a second language version of the source version 3.4. When the source version changes, the translations of the previous source versions are frozen and cannot be changed anymore. Any changes to target languages can only be done in the next source version.
The versioning of translations was one of the things we would have liked to simplify before the code base was changed to a new platform. But as we did not know the platform was being changed before the recoding had been done, it was too late. I still don’t know what would be the best way to ensure that metadata producers learn when the term in their language has changed since ELSST-style publication once a year is not feasible.
Maybe keep the version number the same for all languages (i.e. the source version number) but still leave the current the language specific change history tracking so that people could be able to see just what has changed in their version??? Don’t think it would be too hard to change the version number assignment in the system. The risk for metadata producers is that they would not be able to track anymore whether the language version they use is kept up-to-date with the source unless they compare source and target language changes. In the current system, if the language version is not kept up to date, the latest published version has the version number referring to the previous source version.
Then there would need to be another versioning concerning the whole download/API package (all languages) with version number changing whenever there is a change in any of the languages. I assume this kind of versioning would be needed for systems that have implemented a CV in their system? Even though they might not be interested in that particular language where the change was done. GESIS originally assured me that this separate ‘whole package’ technical versioning would be possible.
I don’t think DDI Alliance thinks that the ‘displayed’ version number of a DDI vocabulary should change if the Greek change one descriptive term. But I may have interpreted things wrong.
It gets complicated when there are the requirements of 1) metadata producers, 2) DDI Alliance, 3) multilingual data catalogues, 4) linked data. And my technical expertise is, as known, not very great.
BTW: We had a meeting yesterday with the Slovak team taking over the CVS technical development. Resolving issues preventing linked open data and resolvable URIs are important issues. Do you think Carsten and John know what is required re those?
All the best, Taina
From: Bell, Darren S <dbell@essex.ac.uk>
Hi Taina – as you may be aware, I’m working with Oliver Hopt at GESIS to make the DDI CVs available as SKOS. I’m trying to find more detail about how versioning is currently handled in CESSDA CV Manager and what triggers a major or a minor version. Are there any documents/specifications related to versioning in the CVS that I could get access to? Best, Darren |
...