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

RE: 列: RegOrg ontology

From: <nikolaos.loutas@pwc.be>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:05:39 +0200
To: <kotis@aegean.gr>, 'Marios__Meimaris'" <m.meimaris@medialab.ntua.gr/O=,/, , ,@pwc.be"@smtp1.pwc.be
Cc: h.athanasakis@samos.gr, kotis@samos.gr, public-gld-comments@w3.org, stijn.goedertier@pwc.be, 另狍翎筮 箩聃暨祜 <n.varitimou@gmail.com>, Vassilios.PERISTERAS@ec.europa.eu
Message-ID: <OF3143A828.490B4DD6-ONC1257B51.004F48FA-C1257B51.0052EA06@pwc.be>
Hi Marios, 

I just want to make a clarification. 

The IHU browser is actually getting data from the public SPARQL endpoint 
available at: http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr/sparql and not from 
http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/

This also explains why Kostas gets different responses when looking up his 
organisation in IHU and in publicspending.gr both in terms of description 
metadata and different URIs. 

However, as Kostas correctly points out, we have made sure that the legal 
entities of IHU are linked to the publicspending.gr ones. 

We have also created a SKOS taxonomy of company types in Greece which 
provides values to rov:companyType. 
The taxonomy was created bottom-up by analysing and reconciling data found 
in the 28000 descriptions of entities used in the pilot application. 
It therefore represents quite accurately the current state of play in 
Greece. 

Effectively, "那滔由 招茄庞闪@gr" is not just a literal. It actually 
corresponds to the prefLabel of a  skos:Concept. 
  
In case there are additional questions and/or feedback on the pilot (which 
is always welcome), please contact me and/or Natasa Varitimou (cc'ed), who 
has been the lead developer. 

Kind regards, 

Nikolaos Loutas
PwC | Principal Advisor
Direct: +32 2 7104619 | Mobile: +32 491 965851 | Fax: +32 2 7104069
Email: nikolaos.loutas@pwc.be
PwC Enterprise Advisory cvba/scrl
Firm legal information, click here




From:   Kotis Kostas <kotis@aegean.gr>
To:     "'Marios Meimaris'" <m.meimaris@medialab.ntua.gr>, 
<public-gld-comments@w3.org>
Cc:     <kotis@samos.gr>, <h.athanasakis@samos.gr>, 
<nikolaos.loutas@pwc.be>, <stijn.goedertier@pwc.be>
Date:   18/04/2013 16:20
Subject:        RE: 列: RegOrg ontology



Thanks for that. Actually, I do know that your work is 'feeding' IHU!!!

I still have a problem though. I'd like to describe it with an example
however: I am searching for the rdf data related to my organization, i.e.
North Aegean Region Administrative Authority (NARAA) "信焉峙雅闪 孪雅上
辽昧上' in Greek, and I get the following 2 responses for both sparql
services respectively:

1. http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/describe/paymentAgents/090344143

(NTUA)
2. http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr/id/company/090344143 (IHU)

As expected, there is a sameAs property relating these entities (defined 
in
IHU dataset). But in (1), the entity is described as "那滔由 招茄庞闪" 
via
the property psgr:legalStatus, and in (2) the entity is described as "
那滔由 招茄庞闪@gr" using the property
http://www.w3.org/ns/regorg#companyType. In addition, you now introduce a
new term to characterize organizations in Greece, using the uri
http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/organizationsOntology#PublicLegalEnti


ty (label "Public Legal Entity", which I guess it comes from your own 
custom
vocabulary (which you say it is a profile of ORG). 

The question is, give all these three different ways to describe the type 
of
my organization, i.e. a 'Greek public formal legal organization', which
namespace will be the most appropriate? I feel that re-using REGORG
namespace is a more appropriate practice, don't you?

Anyways, for me now it is a matter of linking our dataset with one of the
two datasets (IHU or NTUA), since NARAA entity is already defined in the
LOGD (twice).

BR,

Kostas

-----Original Message-----
From: Marios Meimaris [mailto:m.meimaris@medialab.ntua.gr] 
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:26 PM
To: public-gld-comments@w3.org; Kotis Kostas
Subject: Re: 列: RegOrg ontology

Dear Kostas,

     the data from the IHU browser is actually drawn from the sparql
endpoint at http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/ .
The IHU project uses the string descriptions taken from the greek taxation
service (TAXIS), but there is no actual standardization or schema involved
and sometimes the strings have overlapping meanings and even typos.
In the publicspending.gr project we have actually deployed a small 
taxonomy
for greek organizations as a profile of ORG, having in mind future 
mappings
to foreign classification schemata.
You can see the legal entity types here
http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/en/endpoint , selecting the
predefined query "Categorization of legal entities" from the example 
queries
dropdown.


Kind regards,
Marios Meimaris


On 18/04/2013 16:16, Kotis Kostas wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> just found an interesting project in Greece, as an ISA pilot use case by
IHU, where they actually defined a  SKOS concept scheme for Greek Company
types. There they have also included "Public Service" (那滔由 
招茄庞闪@gr)
under http://www.w3.org/ns/regorg#companyType (for greek public
organizations).
>
> I hope you can access the related resource url: 
> http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flinkeddata.ihu

> .edu.gr%2Fid%2Fgrtypes%2Fdy otherwise see at 
> http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr:8080/rdf-browser/

>
> BR,
>
> Konstantinos
>
> Konstantinos Kotis, PhD
> Post Doctoral Research Scientist
> Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus.
> Head of IT Department
> Samos Regional Unit, North Aegean Region Admin. Authority.
>
> Greece
> +30 6974822712
> http://gr.linkedin.com/in/kotis

> ________________________________________
> 琉: Chris Beer [chris@codex.net.au]
> 琉矬麸朕: 藻糗耵, 17 琉耖脒秕 2013 11:32 痨
> 旭矧: Kotis Kostas
> 曙轫.: phila@w3.org; public-gld-comments@w3.org
> 容灬: Re: RegOrg ontology
>
> Hi Kotis
>
> Saw this -> randomly jumping in.
>
> My first instinct (noting the similarities in our organisations in terms
of names ;) ) would be to see your example as an ORG unit/entity which has
the function of Regional Administration.
>
> If the RAB's in Greece conduct a commercial activity (as opposed to say
simply setting policy priorities and administrating grant funding as a
public sector function) then certainly here they would fit the description
of a rov:companyType ( we call them a Government Business Enterprise or 
GBE
- and we would link back to ORG to a Department of State and associated
Cabinet Minister  through a PROV change event such as our Financial
Management Act which governs how the public sector can engage with the
public commercially).
>
> I guess what I am suggesting is to look to already defined PROV and ORG
entities etc, to see if a logical combination presents itself which would
alleviate the creation of a bespoke concept?
>
> 2 cents worth - feel free to disregard or vehemently argue all. :)
>
> Cheers
>
> Chris
>
> -----------------------
>
> Chris Beer
> Manager - Online Services
> Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport
>
> All views my own unless otherwise stated
>
>
> Sent from my ASUS Eee Pad
>
> Kotis Kostas <kotis@aegean.gr> wrote:
>
>> Dear Phil,
>>
>> I am working on an ontology for 'IT helpdesk support ticketing' for
public sector organizations (eGov) and I am using ORG and RegOrg
vocabularies for some upper level descriptions of example data. I think 
that
rov:companyType property is not suitable for public organizations, or is 
it?
Introducing for instance a concept "Regional Administration Body' in order
to classify an instance such as the public organization 'North Aegean
Regional Administration' body of Greece, could be possbile?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> Konstantinos Kotis, PhD
>> Post Doctoral Research Scientist
>> Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus.
>> Head of IT Department
>> Samos Regional Unit, North Aegean Region Admin. Authority.
>>
>> Greece
>> +30 6974822712
>> http://gr.linkedin.com/in/kotis






*Professional Mail*

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed.
If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail,
please notify the author by replying to this e-mail. If you are not
the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy, print or
rely on this e-mail.
 
PwC may monitor outgoing and incoming e-mails and
other telecommunications on its e-mail and telecommunications systems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 15:06:16 UTC

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