Re: ΑΠ: RegOrg ontology

As an aside, a Fed Dept. here is working on a UML based system which will allow for ITSM and ticketing with any provider by providing a generic standard (via API's?) by which to interact with IT support and managed service providers. Will try obtain details to pass on for potential collaboration or reuse. :)

Chris



Sent from Samsung MobileChristopher Gutteridge <cjg@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:Initial feedback. This has turned into more of a brain dump than I expected.

For background, I'm looking getting into our University ticketing system (BMC Remedy) using an API and exporting the information as Linked (but not open) Data, for integration into other internal systems and also augmenting it using links to open data.

If may be that my usecase is different enough that my thoughts are unhelpful, in which case feel free to ignore anything!

1. Can you put a mimetype on http://www.samos.gr/ontologies/helpdeskOnto.owl so it's easier to load into RDF aware tools. It's reporting 'text/plain'

2. Remove needless use of the word 'government'. There's no reason to give the impression it won't be of use for any ticket-based helpdesk at any organisation. It's not in the semantics, just the ontology description.

3. Tickets often have a thread of discussion and people working on them. Possibly SIOC would be useful here?

4. Tickets often have open/close/reopen events.

5. Tickets & tasks frequently have an associated service (email, internet access, scanner in building 7)

6. Tickets have events of being assigned to people or teams.

7. Typo on #IT_Support_Ticket rdfs:comment@en : " resollved" should be "resolved".

8. I'm always very cautious about inventing new 'title' and 'description' terms -- the world has enough of these already. I would strongly consider treating a ticket as a sioc:Post and just use dcterms:title and sioc:content. The more generic terms you use, the more your data can work with other tools without anybody having to do mapping exercises. The other value of SIOC is that it gives you reply threads already well defined.

9. You've made a very dangerous assumption that tasks have numeric integer IDs. I would have used skos:notation for this and given the task IDs a datatype appropriate for the system eg. <ticket> skos:notation "SL39122"^^<http://id.southampton.ac.uk/ns/ServiceLineTicketIDScheme> . This way tickets can have non-numeric values, and even, in rare cases, have identifiers from multiple schemes. This may happen if a migration is done and tickets are moved from one system to another, they would potentially have more than one ID, but in different ID schemes.


On 19/04/2013 08:49, Kotis Kostas wrote:
Dear Nick, Mario (and all),
 
This is a first draft version of the formal vocabulary that we have devised in order to assist the process of opening and integrating our scattered ‘helpdesk’ datasets. It re-uses classes and properties from ORG, RegOrg, DUL and GoodRelations vocabularies. Example individuals have been created to demonstrate the linkage with existing entities of related datasets (IHU, NTUA) and thus to raise further arguments (if any), however the actual helpdesk support data gathered from the scattered data sources (i.e. tickets, tasks, solutions, etc) are not included. Soon it will be possible to browse data, info and entities of our vocabulary on-line (also we plan to make this ‘semantic asset’ available at ISA JoinUp semantic space).
 
We would like to get your feedback at this point, if possible!             At the moment this is not a published work but we are working towards doing this very soon, in the context of other research work (Your contribution will be acknowledged properly J).
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Konstantinos
 
 
From: nikolaos.loutas@pwc.be [mailto:nikolaos.loutas@pwc.be] 
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 6:08 PM
To: Kotis Kostas; 'Marios Meimaris'
Cc: h.athanasakis@samos.gr; kotis@samos.gr; public-gld-comments@w3.org; stijn.goedertier@pwc.be; Vassilios.PERISTERAS@ec.europa.eu; Αναστασία Βαρυτίμου
Subject: RE: ΑΠ: RegOrg ontology
 
Hi Marios, 

I just want to make a clarification.   

The IHU browser is actually getting data from the public SPARQL endpoint available at: http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr/sparql and not from http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/ 
This also explains why Kostas gets different responses when looking up his organisation in IHU and in publicspending.gr both in terms of description metadata and different URIs. 

However, as Kostas correctly points out, we have made sure that the legal entities of IHU are linked to the publicspending.gr ones. 

We have also created a SKOS taxonomy of company types in Greece which provides values to rov:companyType. 
The taxonomy was created bottom-up by analysing and reconciling data found in the 28000 descriptions of entities used in the pilot application. 
It therefore represents quite accurately the current state of play in Greece. 

Effectively, "ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ ΥΠΗΡΕΣΙΑ@gr" is not just a literal. It actually corresponds to the prefLabel of a  skos:Concept. 
  
In case there are additional questions and/or feedback on the pilot (which is always welcome), please contact me and/or Natasa Varitimou (cc'ed), who has been the lead developer. 

Kind regards, 

Nikolaos Loutas
PwC | Principal Advisor
Direct: +32 2 7104619 | Mobile: +32 491 965851 | Fax: +32 2 7104069
Email: nikolaos.loutas@pwc.be
PwC Enterprise Advisory cvba/scrl
Firm legal information, click here




From:        Kotis Kostas <kotis@aegean.gr> 
To:        "'Marios Meimaris'" <m.meimaris@medialab.ntua.gr>, <public-gld-comments@w3.org> 
Cc:        <kotis@samos.gr>, <h.athanasakis@samos.gr>, <nikolaos.loutas@pwc.be>, <stijn.goedertier@pwc.be> 
Date:        18/04/2013 16:20 
Subject:        RE: ΑΠ: RegOrg ontology



Thanks for that. Actually,               I do know that your work is 'feeding' IHU!!!

I still have a problem though. I'd like to describe it with an example
however: I am searching for the rdf data related to my               organization, i.e.
North Aegean Region Administrative Authority (NARAA) "ΠΕΡΙΦΕΡΕΙΑ ΒΟΡΕΙΟΥ
ΑΙΓΑΙΟΥ' in Greek, and I get the following 2 responses for both sparql
services respectively:

1. http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/describe/paymentAgents/090344143
(NTUA)
2. http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr/id/company/090344143 (IHU)

As expected, there is a sameAs property relating these entities (defined in
IHU dataset). But in (1), the entity is described as               "ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ ΥΠΗΡΕΣΙΑ" via
the property psgr:legalStatus, and in (2) the entity is described as "
ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ ΥΠΗΡΕΣΙΑ@gr" using the property
http://www.w3.org/ns/regorg#companyType. In addition, you now introduce a
new term to characterize organizations in Greece, using the uri
http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/organizationsOntology#PublicLegalEnti
ty (label "Public Legal Entity", which I guess it comes from your own custom
vocabulary (which you say it is a profile of ORG). 

The question is, give all these three different ways to describe the type of
my organization, i.e. a 'Greek public formal legal               organization', which
namespace will be the most appropriate? I feel that re-using REGORG
namespace is a more appropriate practice, don't you?

Anyways, for me now it is a matter of linking our dataset with one of the
two datasets (IHU or NTUA), since NARAA entity is already defined in the
LOGD (twice).

BR,

Kostas

-----Original Message-----
From: Marios Meimaris [mailto:m.meimaris@medialab.ntua.gr] 
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:26 PM
To: public-gld-comments@w3.org; Kotis Kostas
Subject: Re: ΑΠ: RegOrg ontology

Dear Kostas,

    the data from the IHU browser is actually drawn from the sparql
endpoint at http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/ .
The IHU project uses the string descriptions taken from the greek taxation
service (TAXIS), but there is no actual standardization or schema involved
and sometimes the strings have overlapping meanings and even typos.
In the publicspending.gr project we have actually deployed a small taxonomy
for greek organizations as a profile of ORG, having in               mind future mappings
to foreign classification schemata.
You can see the legal entity types here
http://publicspending.medialab.ntua.gr/en/endpoint , selecting the
predefined query "Categorization of legal entities" from the example queries
dropdown.


Kind regards,
Marios Meimaris


On 18/04/2013 16:16, Kotis Kostas wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> just found an interesting project in Greece, as an ISA pilot use case by
IHU, where they actually defined a  SKOS concept scheme for Greek Company
types. There they have also included "Public Service" (ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ ΥΠΗΡΕΣΙΑ@gr)
under http://www.w3.org/ns/regorg#companyType (for greek public
organizations).
>
> I hope you can access the related resource url: 
> http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flinkeddata.ihu
> .edu.gr%2Fid%2Fgrtypes%2Fdy otherwise see at 
> MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr80" claiming to be http://linkeddata.ihu.edu.gr:8080/rdf-browser/
>
> BR,
>
> Konstantinos
>
> Konstantinos Kotis, PhD
> Post Doctoral Research Scientist
> Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus.
> Head of IT Department
> Samos Regional Unit, North Aegean Region Admin.               Authority.
>
> Greece
> +30 6974822712
> http://gr.linkedin.com/in/kotis
> ________________________________________
> Από: Chris Beer [chris@codex.net.au]
> Αποστολή: Τετάρτη, 17 Απριλίου 2013 11:32 πμ
> Προς: Kotis Kostas
> Κοιν.: phila@w3.org; public-gld-comments@w3.org
> Θέμα: Re: RegOrg ontology
>
> Hi Kotis
>
> Saw this -> randomly jumping in.
>
> My first instinct (noting the similarities in our organisations in terms
of names ;) ) would be to see your example as an ORG               unit/entity which has
the function of Regional Administration.
>
> If the RAB's in Greece conduct a commercial activity (as opposed to say
simply setting policy priorities and administrating grant funding as a
public sector function) then certainly here they would fit the description
of a rov:companyType ( we call them a Government Business Enterprise or GBE
- and we would link back to ORG to a Department of State and associated
Cabinet Minister  through a PROV change event such as our Financial
Management Act which governs how the public sector can engage with the
public commercially).
>
> I guess what I am suggesting is to look to already defined PROV and ORG
entities etc, to see if a logical combination presents itself which would
alleviate the creation of a bespoke concept?
>
> 2 cents worth - feel free to disregard or vehemently argue all. :)
>
> Cheers
>
> Chris
>
> -----------------------
>
> Chris Beer
> Manager - Online Services
> Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport
>
> All views my own unless otherwise stated
>
>
> Sent from my ASUS Eee Pad
>
> Kotis Kostas <kotis@aegean.gr> wrote:
>
>> Dear Phil,
>>
>> I am working on an ontology for 'IT helpdesk support ticketing' for
public sector organizations (eGov) and I am using ORG and RegOrg
vocabularies for some upper level descriptions of example data. I think that
rov:companyType property is not suitable for public organizations, or is it?
Introducing for instance a concept "Regional Administration Body' in order
to classify an instance such as the public organization 'North Aegean
Regional Administration' body of Greece, could be possbile?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> Konstantinos Kotis, PhD
>> Post Doctoral Research Scientist
>> Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus.
>> Head of IT Department
>> Samos Regional Unit, North Aegean Region Admin.               Authority.
>>
>> Greece
>> +30 6974822712
>> http://gr.linkedin.com/in/kotis





*Professional Mail* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed.
If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail,
please notify the author by replying to this e-mail. If you           are not
the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy, print or
rely on this e-mail.
 
PwC may monitor outgoing and incoming e-mails and
other telecommunications on its e-mail and telecommunications systems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Christopher Gutteridge -- http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cjg

University of Southampton Open Data Service: http://data.southampton.ac.uk/
You should read the ECS Web Team blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/