Re: Editing Requirements From FPWD BP Wiki Page

Hi Jeremy,

A warm +1 to dealing with quality data with care! I'd say we already got
that covered at data quality is being described as part of the meta-data.
If it is not already stated we should stress out that it is not mandatory
to provide all the meta-data as open data and that some of it could be
restricted. For instance, in DANS we have a number of dataset describing
archaeological investigation with geolocation metadata attached to it. In
order to prevent people from to go out and dig things out this meta-data is
not placed as part of the open description but rather added as additional
meta-data accessible once consumers are logged in with an vetted account.

Regarding issue 116 I think we could figure out and propose different way
to provide access to restricted meta-data. For instance, putting it in a
bundle next to the data and ensure access to that bundle is controlled, or
have something in an API that returns different description based on the
API key used (no key: open, valid key: open + restricted), or follow the
mechanism you applied in DIACHRON (by the way, I think you forgot to put
the ref for [1])

Cheers,
Christophe


On 20 April 2015 at 11:02, Debattista, Jeremy <
Jeremy.Debattista@iais.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

>  Hi Antoine,
>
>  I went through the quality documents, and there is almost nothing left
> to contribute! I think that most issues I can think of have been discussed.
>
>  I have two comments regarding sensitive data and Issue 116, which I
> would like to share with you.
>
>  With regard to issue 116, i tend to agree on having quality metadata
> graphs (well expected from me :)), which could be either part of the
> dataset or in a separate file that could be found/crawled by robots. On the
> other hand each dataset should have a simple link (triple in case of LD) to
> this metadata graph. Maybe they should also be added in site maps (if they
> are still used).
>
>  The sensitive data issue is something which should not be taken lightly.
> From my experience with data publishers in the DIACHRON project, there are
> companies which are making money from clients by publishing *their *raw
> data into “Linked Open Data”, BUT they (more specific the data publishers)
> do not want that quality information is distributed freely. They would like
> to get data quality information to improve their processes (especially if
> it comes for free), but they don’t want it freely published for obvious
> reasons. I was discussing with our project partners what might be a
> possible solution, and the most plausible one was to use privacy mechanisms
> such as [1]. I tried convincing them that it is stupid because they are
> publishing “Open Data”, but I can understand that when it comes down to
> money, *openness* is a grey area.
>
>
>  Cheers,
> Jer
>
>
>
>  On 18 Apr 2015, at 12:23, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:
>
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> Thanks for your willingness to contribute!
> It's fine if you directly edit wiki pages or send email, as you see fit.
> Two caveats though:
>
> - please keep Christophe, Riccardo and Deirdre in the look if you have
> significant questions or suggestions. I'm not the only one working on this
>
> - the page you mention is meant to capture requirements from the Best
> Practices document. There is another wiki page for requirements from the
> Use Case and Requirement document [1]. If you were  about to add
> requirements that are based on the state-of-the-art or your own work in
> DaQ, then it could be on another page. We have a parent page for all
> quality work at [2]. Maybe your new stuff could fit an entirely different
> page. It depends on what you wanted to say :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Antoine
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Quality_Requirements_From_UCR
> [2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_quality_notes
>
> On 4/17/15 7:14 PM, Debattista, Jeremy wrote:
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
> Is it ok for me to edit the requirements in the wikipage [1], or shall I
> send you my thoughts if I have any? I will be going through the
> requirements this weekend.
>
> Sorry for my late feedback, but I was very busy lately.
>
> Cheers,
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Requirements_From_FPWD_BP
>
>
>


-- 
Onderzoeker
DANS, Anna van Saksenlaan 51, 2593 HW Den Haag
+31(0)6 14576494
christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl


*Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS/KNAW)*[image:
http://dans.knaw.nl] <http://dans.knaw.nl>

*e-Humanities Group (KNAW)*
[image: eHumanities] <http://www.ehumanities.nl/>

*World Wide Semantic Web community*
http://worldwidesemanticweb.org/