Re: Editable version of DUV model Action-178

In addition to what we are discussing here are some references:


Annotation:
http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#introduction
http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#annotation

Feedback:
http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/#sec-xref sioc:Forum, sioc:Thread, sioc:Post

Feedback Ratings:
http://wiki.sioc-project.org/index.php/Ontology/RatingTermsSuggestion,
http://vocab.org/review/terms.html

Citation:
http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/http://purl.org/spar/cito
See:  *IRI:* http://purl.org/spar/cito/isCitedAsDataSourceBy

>From Ghislain
ex:dts
    cito:citesAsAuthority <linkToAuthorityPublisher> ;
    cito:citesForInformation <linkToCEOArticle> ;

Cheers,

Eric S


On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 7:41 PM, Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com> wrote:

> Laufer ,
>
> Take a look at my comments below and let me know what you think.
>
> Thanks so much!
>
> Cheers
>
> Eric
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 22, 2015, at 6:56 PM, Laufer <laufer@globo.com> wrote:
>
> Eric,
>
> Your definition of Annotation seems as a type of metadata provided by the
> producer. For the Web Annotation WG a big set of Annotations are provided
> by the Readers (Consumers). And these Annotations could also be annotated,
> creating threads (conversations), that seems with your definition of
> Feedback.
>
> Interesting.  I get the concept of annotation, this is commonly used in
> scientific collaborations.  E.g scientist A adds metadata to scientist's B
> dataset.
>
> Again we need to bring the formal definitions of Annotation into what we
> are doing.  Thank you for sharing.
>
> Feedback could be considered another type of annotation, however I like
> the idea of keeping documentation and feedback separate.  Documentation
> (annotation) can be overwritten but feedback is only appended in a directed
> graph.
>
> Does this sound reasonable?
>
> Maybe our Annotations are really different from the Web Annotation WG.
>
> Feedback seems to me (just feelings) to be more than the (human)
> conversations around the Dataset.
>
> I thought that Citation was the inverse: the reference that other
> published material makes to the Dataset. Sorry.
>
> Why couldn't citation represent citation e.g DOI for dataset, and what I
> was proposing.  I think we should accommodate both if possible.
>
> Your definition of Citation is to reference who talks about the Dataset.
> In my definition, Citation is how one references the Dataset when talking
> about the Dataset.
>
> Cheers,
> Laufer
>
>
> Em quarta-feira, 22 de abril de 2015, Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
>> Laufer,
>>
>> Many thanks for your "feedback" :-)  For reference here are some
>> definitions to show you point of view and comments to your statements are
>> below with the -->
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> Definitions from my Point of View
>> To me the 3 distinct elements of the Dataset Usage Vocabulary are: usage,
>> feedback, and citation.
>>
>> Usage
>> UsageAnnotation is a form of Dataset documentation most likely provided
>> by the publisher or producer.
>> DatasetUsage->Application is a form of Dataset documentation that
>> describes an application that can use the data.
>>
>> Feedback
>> Feedback will mostly be a dialog that a data publisher sets up for data
>> consumers to provide comments about the Dataset or to each other.
>>
>> Citation
>> Citation from a Dataset Usage Vocabulary perspective is a reference to
>> other published material about the Dataset.
>>
>>
>> Comments to your questions and concerns below....
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Laufer <laufer@globo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Bernadette, Eric,
>>>
>>> First of all, thank you.
>>>
>>> I would like to know what are the differences between what you are
>>> calling Feedback and Annotation. To me, Annotation is a way to provide
>>> Feedback.
>>>
>>>
>> --> Based on the way I'm defining it at this point I disagree.
>>
>>
>>> Second, Feedback has specializations that are of different natures:
>>> Opinion and Rating are related to the content type of the Feedback
>>> (Annotation?), while Blog is related to the type of the place of the
>>> content (that could be an Opinion with a Citation, etc.).
>>>
>>
>> --> I think if we combine Feedback and Annotation we lose the distinction
>> of who said what.
>>
>>
>>> In the diagram, Citation has no relation to an Agent. An Agent cites a
>>> Citation.
>>>
>>> --> I see your point, I agree.
>>
>>
>>> I don't understand exactly the relation of Citation with DatasetUsage.
>>> As I said in a previous e-mail, I see Citation as a relation between the
>>> Dataset and an Annotation that provides Feedback. The number of Citations
>>> give some kind of feedback (as h-index) but the content where the the
>>> Citation is used is very important (the reverse link).
>>>
>>> --> Based on the way I described things about I'm tending to agree with
>> you about the relationship between Dataset Usage and Citation.
>>
>>
>>> We have to take care with the term Annotation because the Web Annotation
>>> WG has a well-defined meaning to that. Are we using the same meaning?
>>>
>>> --> Yes I believe that is what we mean, although we need to look at the
>> way the Annotation working group is defining it to make sure that is the
>> correct way to go.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>> Laufer
>>>
>>> 2015-04-22 12:12 GMT-03:00 Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks so much Bernadette!  My comments below.
>>>>
>>>> Eric
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 22, 2015, at 7:18 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Eric,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you very much for the examples! They are really useful! My
>>>> comments are inline.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Example 1:  Jian wants to provide "readme" information that includes
>>>>> recommended uses and some background information with a previously
>>>>> published climate model diagnostics dataset
>>>>> http://example.com/atmos/sgp-uncertainty/ .  To do this Jian
>>>>> publishes "duv:UsageAnnotation".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. In this case, Jian creates an annotation that describes a specific
>>>> type of DatasetUsage (ex: duv:GeneralInformation). However, the current
>>>> version of the model doesn't have this type of DatasetUsage.Should we
>>>> include a new subclass?
>>>>
>>>> I was thinking this was UsageAnnotation, no?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Example 2:  Laura has a perl script 2d-plotter.pl that creates
>>>>> quarterly (3 month) jpeg plots from netcdf files contained in the model
>>>>> diagnostics dataset http://example.com/atmos/sgp-uncertainty/ . Laura
>>>>> makes the perl script available in github and publishes "duv:Application"
>>>>> that associates 2d-plotter.pl with the dataset.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. From the point of view of Laura, she publishes a duv:Application.
>>>> However, from the point of view of the Publisher, it is also possible to
>>>> associate a duv:UsageAnnotation to the dataset in order to provide
>>>> information about who is using the dataset. Does it make sense for you
>>>>
>>>> Yes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Example 3:  Matt publishes a peer reviewed technical report on errors
>>>>> and imprecision found in the model diagnostics dataset over limited time
>>>>> periods when the observational data was collected. Matt publishes
>>>>> "duv:Citation" that associates a citation reference to the technical report.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes! This is similar to Example 2.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this how you are thinking it would work?  I am beginning to wonder
>>>>> if we really need the DatasetUsage class, I don't know what this adds.  It
>>>>> is helpful in the conceptual model, but in practice it seems like it
>>>>> unnecessary overhead.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree with you that in practice maybe it won't be necessary to have
>>>> the DatasetUsage class. However, let's wait a little more before to remove
>>>> it :) Let's see if it is really unnecessary.
>>>>
>>>> I am fine with this, thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Bernadette
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Eric S
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:37 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <
>>>>> bfl@cin.ufpe.br> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Eric,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The idea of having the class duv:UsageAnnotation is to have a way to
>>>>>> describe how datasets can be annotated with information about their usage.
>>>>>> In this case, I don't see it as a subclass of duv:DatasetUsage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We can also have a similar way to annotate a dataset with information
>>>>>> about feedback gathered from consumers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that in the dataset usage vocab, we should consider two
>>>>>> scenarios. The first one is how data consumers will provide information
>>>>>> about the dataset usage and feedback. The second one is how a dataset can
>>>>>> be annotated with such information. Does it make sense for you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Bernadette
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2015-04-22 9:14 GMT-03:00 Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bernadette,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I really like where you put data citation as a subclass to
>>>>>>> duv:DatasetUsage (I changed the class name, do you agree?), it seems like
>>>>>>> UsageAnnotation could be a subclass to DatasetUsage.  What are your
>>>>>>> thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Eric S
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:01 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <
>>>>>>> bfl@cin.ufpe.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ok Eric! Thank you!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> cheers,
>>>>>>>> Bernadette
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2015-04-22 8:55 GMT-03:00 Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thank you Bernadette,  it looks great.  I'm just responding with
>>>>>>>>> the action number to record your email in the action tracker.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Eric S
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <
>>>>>>>>> bfl@cin.ufpe.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Now we have an editable version of the DUV model available on
>>>>>>>>>> google drive [1].
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please feel free to make comments and updates!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>>>>>> Bernadette
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1aq3vPcoj0SPs5BispD6umQNejrBTwkhsSYu6Y1adUjw/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
>>>>>>>>>> Centro de Informática
>>>>>>>>>> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
>>>>>>>> Centro de Informática
>>>>>>>> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
>>>>>> Centro de Informática
>>>>>> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
>>>> Centro de Informática
>>>> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> .  .  .  .. .  .
>>> .        .   . ..
>>> .     ..       .
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> .  .  .  .. .  .
> .        .   . ..
> .     ..       .
>
>