W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > October 2015

Re: dwbp-ISSUE-200: Can we align the quality dimension hints in DQV with the ones in ISO 25012? [Quality & Granularity Vocabulary]

From: Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:27:52 -0400
The ISO standard is really a glossary of the components of Data Quality.
It defines useful terms of reference, but it doesn't tell you how to
measure or improve data quality, or even how to calculate or derive values
for the components and terms.

In my view alignment adds value in that it means we don't have to define
those terms, but I would hope we can go beyond the linguistic definitions.



Best Regards,

Steve

Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again"



From:	Riccardo Albertoni <albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it>
To:	Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group
            <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Date:	10/05/2015 06:41 AM
Subject:	Re: dwbp-ISSUE-200: Can we align the quality dimension hints in
            DQV  with the ones in ISO 25012? [Quality & Granularity
            Vocabulary]



Hi Nandana,


Thanks for the very  valuable input.


At least two quality dimension classifications can be considered when
providing examples  in section 7
      Dimensions defined in ISO 25012 http
      ://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-standards/iso-25012, you have
      mentioned;
      Dimensions collected in the "Quality Assessment for Linked Data: A
      Survey",
      http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/quality-assessment-linked-data-survey




I tend to think we should cite both and let the DQV adopters to select the
one which best fits their needs.


In my opinion section 7 [1], "Dimensions”, should  offer a  categorisation
of quality dimensions, which is not intended to be normative: It can't be,
we actually want that  quality framework emerging in the future can define
their quality dimensions and categories as they need. As you know,  there
is a lot of  people  which work on  quality and we don't want to close the
door to  new measures which  are likely to be defined in the future.


 At the same time, I agree on  providing  examples of  categorisation for
dimensions which can  provide  guidance for those  who don’t need to define
their own dimension / categories.





So my proposal is to align the current  DQV  classifications with the ISO,
but also citing the classification from zaveri et al as a possible
classification to be adopted.


How the group feels about this proposal?


I guess that some sort of mapping between the two classifications would be
helpful, but   I am neither  sure  that mapping can be  easy  found nor it
is in the scope of our work. Perhaps we should ask to externals ( and
Zaveri, Maurino & Co in particular )  if anyone has already defined such a
mapping.





Best regards,


Riccardo





On 25 September 2015 at 17:52, Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group
Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
  dwbp-ISSUE-200: Can we align the quality dimension hints in DQV with the
  ones in  ISO 25012? [Quality & Granularity Vocabulary]

  http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/200


  Raised by: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya
  On product: Quality & Granularity Vocabulary

  When looking at the quality dimension hints in DQV and ISO 25012 (SQuaRE
  - Data quality model), there is a big overlap. I did an initial
  comparison and all except for relevance and statistics fit in.

  Comparison of DQV and ISO 25012 dimensions
  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VMe--lhbiRGvQW1eWsYhUW2TeUBVxR3hzNskIPtSZoM/edit#gid=0



  ISO 25012 provides definitions for each dimension developed by the TC. It
  will good to refer to them whenever possible and define new ones only
  when it's necessary.

  Some terms have to be unified such as
  1. Currentness, Timeliness
  2. Compliance, Conformance





  --
  This message has been scanned by E.F.A. Project and is believed to be
  clean.





--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Riccardo Albertoni
Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche "Enrico
Magenes"
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA
tel. +39-010-6475624 - fax +39-010-6475660
e-mail: Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it
Skype: callto://riccardoalbertoni/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni

www: http://www.ge.imati.cnr.it/Albertoni

http://purl.oclc.org/NET/riccardoAlbertoni

FOAF:http://purl.oclc.org/NET/RiccardoAlbertoni/foaf


z{S}ĝxjǺ
z{mʗ{٥r
z{Ch+bx)<html><body><p>The ISO standard is really a glossary of the components of Data Quality.  It defines useful terms of reference, but it doesn't tell you how to measure or improve data quality, or even how to calculate or derive values for the components and terms.<br><br>In my view alignment adds value in that it means we don't have to define those terms, but I would hope we can go beyond the linguistic definitions.<br><br><br><br>Best Regards,<br><br>Steve<br><br>Motto: &quot;Do First, Think, Do it Again&quot;<br><br><img width="16" height="16" src="cid:1__=0ABBF44BDFC721A18f9e8a93df938690918c0AB@" border="0" alt="Inactive hide details for Riccardo Albertoni ---10/05/2015 06:41:03 AM---Hi Nandana, Thanks for the very  valuable input."><font color="#424282">Riccardo Albertoni ---10/05/2015 06:41:03 AM---Hi Nandana, Thanks for the very  valuable input.</font><br><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">From:        </font><font size="2">Riccardo Albertoni &lt;albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it&gt;</font><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">To:        </font><font size="2">Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group &lt;public-dwbp-wg@w3.org&gt;</font><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">Date:        </font><font size="2">10/05/2015 06:41 AM</font><br><font size="2" color="#5F5F5F">Subject:        </font><font size="2">Re: dwbp-ISSUE-200: Can we align the quality dimension hints in DQV  with the ones in ISO 25012? [Quality &amp; Granularity Vocabulary]</font><br><hr width="100%" size="2" align="left" noshade style="color:#8091A5; "><br><br><br><font size="4">Hi Nandana, </font><p><font size="4">Thanks for the very  valuable input. </font><p><font size="4">At least two quality dimension classifications can be considered when providing examples  in section 7</font><ul><ul type="disc"><li><font size="4">Dimensions defined in ISO 25012 http</font><a href="http://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-standards/iso-25012"><u><font size="4" color="#0000FF">://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-25000-standards/iso-25012</font></u></a><font size="4">, you have mentioned;</font><li><font size="4">Dimensions collected in the &quot;Quality Assessment for Linked Data: A Survey&quot;, </font><a href="http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/quality-assessment-linked-data-survey"><u><font size="4" color="#0000FF">http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/quality-assessment-linked-data-survey</font></u></a><font size="4">  </font></ul></ul><font size="4">I tend to think we should cite both and let the DQV adopters to select the one which best fits their needs.</font><p><font size="4">In my opinion section 7 [1], &quot;Dimensions”, should  offer a  categorisation of quality dimensions, which is not intended to be normative: It can't be, we actually want that  quality framework emerging in the future can define their quality dimensions and categories as they need. As you know,  there is a lot of  people  which work on  quality and we don't want to close the door to  new measures which  are likely to be defined in the future.</font><p><font size="4"> At the same time, I agree on  providing  examples of  categorisation for dimensions which can  provide  guidance for those  who don’t need to define their own dimension / categories.  </font><p><p><font size="4">So my proposal is to align the current  DQV  classifications with the ISO, but also citing the classification from zaveri et al as a possible classification to be adopted.</font><p><font size="4">How the group feels about this proposal? </font><p><font size="4">I guess that some sort of mapping between the two classifications would be helpful, but   I am neither  sure  that mapping can be  easy  found nor it is in the scope of our work. Perhaps we should ask to externals ( and  Zaveri, Maurino &amp; Co in particular )  if anyone has already defined such a  mapping.</font><p><p><font size="4">Best regards, </font><p><font size="4">Riccardo</font><p><br><br><br><font size="4">On 25 September 2015 at 17:52, Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Issue Tracker &lt;</font><a href="mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org" target="_blank"><u><font size="4" color="#0000FF">sysbot+tracker@w3.org</font></u></a><font size="4">&gt; wrote:</font><ul><font size="4">dwbp-ISSUE-200: Can we align the quality dimension hints in DQV with the ones in  ISO 25012? [Quality &amp; Granularity Vocabulary]<br></font><u><font size="4" color="#0000FF"><br></font></u><a href="http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/200" target="_blank"><u><font size="4" color="#0000FF">http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/200</font></u></a><font size="4"><br><br>Raised by: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya<br>On product: Quality &amp; Granularity Vocabulary<br><br>When looking at the quality dimension hints in DQV and ISO 25012 (SQuaRE - Data quality model), there is a big overlap. I did an initial comparison and all except for relevance and statistics fit in.<br><br>Comparison of DQV and ISO 25012 dimensions</font><u><font size="4" color="#0000FF"><br></font></u><a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VMe--lhbiRGvQW1eWsYhUW2TeUBVxR3hzNskIPtSZoM/edit#gid=0" target="_blank"><u><font size="4" color="#0000FF">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VMe--lhbiRGvQW1eWsYhUW2TeUBVxR3hzNskIPtSZoM/edit#gid=0</font></u></a><font size="4"><br><br>ISO 25012 provides definitions for each dimension developed by the TC. It will good to refer to them whenever possible and define new ones only when it's necessary.<br><br>Some terms have to be unified such as<br>1. Currentness, Timeliness<br>2. Compliance, Conformance<br><br><br><br><br><br>--<br>This message has been scanned by E.F.A. Project and is believed to be clean.<br><br></font></ul><font size="4"><br></font><br><br><font size="4">-- </font><br>----------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Riccardo Albertoni<br>Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche &quot;Enrico Magenes&quot;<br>Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche<br>via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA<br>tel. +39-010-6475624 - fax +39-010-6475660<br>e-mail: <a href="mailto:Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0000FF">Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it</font></u></a><br>Skype: <a href="callto://riccardoalbertoni/" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0000FF">callto://riccardoalbertoni/</font></u></a><br>LinkedIn: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0000FF">http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni</font></u></a><br>www: <a href="http://www.ge.imati.cnr.it/Albertoni" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0000FF">http://www.ge.imati.cnr.it/Albertoni</font></u></a><br><a href="http://purl.oclc.org/NET/riccardoAlbertoni" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0000FF">http://purl.oclc.org/NET/riccardoAlbertoni</font></u></a><br>FOAF:<a href="http://purl.oclc.org/NET/RiccardoAlbertoni/foaf" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0000FF">http://purl.oclc.org/NET/RiccardoAlbertoni/foaf</font></u></a><br><BR>
</body></html>

z{mʗ
z{Ch+bx)~)^
z{H
z{S}ĝxjǺGIF89aeglHI
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2015 15:31:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 8 October 2015 15:31:28 UTC