- From: Harshvardhan J. Pandit <me@harshp.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:13:55 +0530
- To: Kalvin Eng <kalvin.eng@ualberta.ca>, public-dpvcg <public-dpvcg@w3.org>
Hi Kalvin, DOB (date-of-birth) is certainly a commonly used personal data, and we should add it to DPV Personal Data Categories. IMO, DOB is not a health record - as it does not concern health. Similarly, while DOB is indicative of Age, it should not be a subclass of Age (DPV currently has Age-range too). It can be a sub class of life history to denote an event in life (i.e. birth). So my proposal would be to add it as a subclass of Historical. Regards, Harsh On 19/12/19 3:34 am, Kalvin Eng wrote: > Hello All, > > I also have another question about DPV 1.0. > > Should 'date of birth' be created as a sub-class? > It seems like it could be subclasses of dpv:Age > <https://www.w3.org/ns/dpv#dpv:Age>, dpv:HealthRecord > <https://www.w3.org/ns/dpv#dpv:HealthRecord>, dpv:LifeHistory > <https://www.w3.org/ns/dpv#dpv:LifeHistory>. > > Date of birth seems like something that should be included standard for > the vocabulary. > > Thanks, > Kalvin > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 8:30 AM Piero Bonatti > <pieroandrea.bonatti@unina.it <mailto:pieroandrea.bonatti@unina.it>> wrote: > > Hallo Harsh and Xiaohu, > > concerning historical data, may I support the view expressed in the > mentioned chat, that is: > > On 13/12/19 13:42, Harshvardhan J. Pandit wrote: > > If one wants to express health data > > [or any other data category] > > > as also historial data, they can > > subclass it > > > > e.g. HealthHistory rdfs:subClassOf HealthData, HistoricalData. > > The same approach would apply, by analogy, to "AnonymizedData" (a > useful > term that IMHO is currently missing in the vocabulary). Note that > "anonymized" is not the same as "anonymous", since all the known > anonymization methods give only probabilistic guarantees of > non-identification, therefore they do not imply that the result of > anonymization is not "personal data" in the sense of the GDPR. > Anonymized data should be regarded as somewhere in between pseudonymous > and anonymous. > > OWL2 and most of its profiles (including the logic PL adopted by > special) support also an alternative formulation for expressing the > intersection of two classes on the fly, without adding terms to the > ontology, for example: > > ObjectIntersectionOf( HealthData HistoricalData ) > ObjectIntersectionOf( HealthData AnonymizedData ) > > In the aforementioned languages, vocabularies need not be extended with > all the intersection of the above form, preventing class proliferation > in the vocabulary. > > regards, > Piero > -- --- Harshvardhan J. Pandit PhD Researcher ADAPT Centre, Trinity College Dublin https://harshp.com/
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2019 09:44:08 UTC