Re: Code lists in the UCR

+1
Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote on 26-03-2015 17:13:52:

> A long long time ago I raised an issue which should really have been an 
> action item to consider whether the use case doc sufficiently called for 

> code lists to be used where possible cf. free text.
> 
> We have a requirement at [1] called R-VocabReference that is defined as:
> 
> Existing reference vocabularies should be reused where possible
> 
> It is motivated by a long list of use cases that, as far as I can see, 
> do not explicitly call for the use of controlled vocabularies but most, 
> if not al, imply it. For example, the Wind Characterization Study UC 
> says "The DMF catalog relies on linked open vocabularies and domain 
> vocabularies to make the study data searchable." The Open City data 
> Pipeline says "Added value comes from comparable open datasets being 
> combined."
> 
> I would put "using code lists/preferred values from a list rather than a 

> free text box" is a truth we hold to be self-evident and therefore we 
> probably have enough evidence to include this in the BPs?
> 
> So my proposal is, rather than creating/finding another use case that 
> calls explicitly for the use of code lists, simply to expand the 
> definition of this requirement thus:
> 
> R-VocabReference
>    Existing reference vocabularies and code lists should be reused where 

> possible.
> 
> i.e. just insert "and code lists".
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> Phil
> 
> Tracker: this is issue-48
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp-ucr/#R-VocabReference
> -- 
> 
> 
> Phil Archer
> W3C Data Activity Lead
> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
> 
> http://philarcher.org
> +44 (0)7887 767755
> @philarcher1
>