| Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
Simple Codebook Meeting 2017-03-28 Attendees: Dan Gillman, Larry Hoyle, Jared Lyle, Oliver Hopt Discussion on an issue in Jira concerning the pysical data description within SC, (CWG-8) displaying the relation to DataDescriptionView - Result was, that all classes listed there should be in SimpleCodebookView so Larry will add them. Looking back at the work in the Norway Sprint, saying that, we could cover all DDI-C elements into DDI-V classes. - This might convince DDI-C users to upgrade, especially if we offer a more user friendly access to the mapping, that we created. - It will also be important to show, how actual examples wil look like, without all the extra attributes within the classes, that are not applicable within a certain view. - This is also a strength of the views in general. - And tools will help with hiding complexity. A tool for editing SimpleCodebookView metadata might look exactly the same as a DDI-C tool. - From that point on, we could start to show, what the benefit would be from switching to DDI-V by making visible, what then would be possible. |
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
Simple Codebook Meeting 2017-03-14 Attendees: Dan Gillman, Larry Hoyle, Oliver Hopt Looking into Larry's YAML template, which is very usefull for identifying classes with to much detail modeled. Reduction is absolutly neccessary A lot of things could be reduced to just a URI. This will include ExternalControlledVocabulary, ExternalMaterial. If interoperability is needed for the content of these classes, it will be possible to download through the URI. The most cases with interoperability will be those that rely on DDI data, which will be identified directly by the prefix of the URI. This is to be discused within the modelling team. |
...
| Expand | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
Codebook meeting 2 February 2016 Attending: Dan, Michelle, Steve, Oliver, Jon, Larry, Jared There’s some lack of clarity about where this group is at. Discussed what to include in simple codebooks. One idea is to review the spreadsheet of common elements (summary of CESSDA) and build on that. Essentials seem to include: enough information to read the data into statistical package, label values, understand universe, understand what measure means so you can interpret the data, attribution information. Another idea is to look at examples of simple codebooks, identify what they use, and then map to a model. We need to be careful to keep things simple. Even older versions of DDI 2 weren’t exactly simple. If we nail down definitions, then do we make instances of previous versions incompatible? As we define what information elements we want in DDI 4.0, we can specify which element you want in 2 if you’re going backwards. Next steps:
|
...