W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-comments@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [publishing-statistical-data] W3C Data Cube Last Call

From: Guillaume Duffes <guillaume.duffes@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 14:48:37 +0200
Message-ID: <CACmwpp7pq7C=SKve3NkDQT0PT-DizZFkJTZ8HdmvCNgOW8hETw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Cc: public-gld-comments@w3.org, Cotton Franck <franck.cotton@insee.fr>

Yes, the additional paragraph addresses this issue.

Thank you for that.


2013/4/5 Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>

> Dear Guillaume,
> Thank you very much for your helpful comments on the Data Cube last call.
> We will give a formal response to the various issues you raise in due
> course.
> In the meantime I wonder if I could ask a clarifying question.
>  _*6.4*_ : “ /In a data set with multiple observations
>> //*[measures ??]*//**//then we add an additional dimension whose value
>> indicates the measure. This is appropriate for applications where the
>> measures are separate aggregate statistics“/→ I do not completely agree
>> with that.
>> First, I guess you meant multiple measures instead of observations.
>> The above-mentioned “ /additional dimension/ “, that is the measure
>> dimension is defined in SDMX 2.1 as “/ is a special type of dimension
>> which defines multiple measures in a data structure definition. [..].
>> Note that it is necessary that these representations are compliant (the
>> same or derived from) with that of the primary measure.” /The primary
>> measure which represents the value of the phenomenon to be measured via
>> a reference to a concept, is mandatory and can take its semantic from
>> any concept, although it is provided as a fixed identifier (OBS_VALUE).
>> The SDMX MeasureDimension is above all a dimension, admittedly of a
>> particular type, whereas it seems to me that the RDF Data Cube
>> MeasureDimension, declared as a qb:MeasureType is primarily a measure.
>> In my mind it is exemplified by the fact that the qb:MeasureType
>> component is a dimension property with an implicit code list whereas
>> SDMX requires a reference to an explicit ConceptScheme whether its
>> representation be made explicit or not. I think it would be worth
>> mentioning this slight difference.
> I do agree that qb:MeasureType is unusual in this respect of having an
> implicit code list, despite being a qb:DimensionProperty.
> This is called out in section 6.5.2 [1] third paragraph.
> Is that explanatory paragraph sufficient if we clarify that this notion of
> an implicit code list for qb:MeasureType is a small divergence from SDMX?
> Thanks,
> Dave
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-**vocab-data-cube-20130312/#dsd-**mm-dim<http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-vocab-data-cube-20130312/#dsd-mm-dim>
Received on Friday, 5 April 2013 12:49:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 10 October 2018 10:43:22 UTC