Re: structure form to consolidate taxonomies

Hi Axel, Everyone.

Spoke with Mark, and spreadsheets would be ideal for the F2F as they're 
the easiest and involve least amount of work. If everyone is comfortable 
with Google Sheets, then that. Otherwise whatever is preferable to most 
participants.

Regarding schema: I think the schema would be different for each 
taxonomy/ontology.

Common fields/columns: name, description, source/reference, synonyms

For hierarchical taxonomies, we would also need to have a "parent 
term(s)" field.

Regarding requirements or constraints, such as those for Consent 
Receipt, we would need a field that states the particular constraint. 
E.g. a field is required/optional, values can only be binary, must have 
a particular property. etc.

For taxonomies that have properties/relationships, such as reference 
field for stating law for legal obligation legal basis, these properties 
should be documented separately from the classes/concepts. Properties 
should have fields name, domain, range, description, source/reference 
(if present)

A few things off the top of my head regarding different taxonomies:

1) personal data: narrow/broad to express relationship between data 
categories - e.g. name & first name

2) data storage: we do not need to write down all ISO country codes, 
merely stating something like range is ISO country codes will suffice 
for now - we will expand all country codes after the F2F.

3) reusing existing taxonomies: if we know a particular taxonomy exists, 
then let us mention it in the spreadsheet, and later align the terms 
with those from that ontology. E.g. to refer to EU law, EURLEX/ELI can 
be used, so we list them as potential candidates in the document

4) examples (preferably real-world ones) would be nice to have 
associated with a term or property where possible.


After the F2F, depending on the quality of the spreadsheet, we can clean 
them and use mapping (RML) or even a generic script to ease the task of 
generating taxonomies from the terms - but IMHO the focus of the F2F 
should be on discussion and agreement over the terms rather than 
generating RDF/OWL files immediately.

Regards,

Harsh

On 02/04/2019 15:35, Axel Polleres wrote:
> Hi HArsh,
>
> we discussed today what would be the best way to collaboratively edit the taxonomies in the F2F:
>
> my idea was to simply use google spreadhseets with a fixed schema
>
> something like:
>
>   term; description; taxonomy; broaderterms; narrowerterms; provenance;
>
> or alike
> which hopefully all can fill in from the current discussions.
>
> Would that work? Or do you have a better tool or proscesss to work out thetaxonomy on github?
>
>
> Axel
>
> --
> Prof. Dr. Axel Polleres
> Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna
> url: http://www.polleres.net/  twitter: @AxelPolleres
>
>
-- 
---
Harshvardhan Pandit
PhD Researcher
ADAPT Centre
Trinity College Dublin

Received on Tuesday, 2 April 2019 18:14:05 UTC