- From: Charles Hoffman <CharlesHoffman@olywa.net>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 08:34:37 -0700
- To: 'Benedikt Kämpgen' <kaempgen@fzi.de>, "'Frankel, David'" <david.frankel@sap.com>, <public-gld-comments@w3.org>
- Cc: "'O'Riain, Sean'" <sean.oriain@deri.org>, "'Andreas Harth'" <harth@kit.edu>, "'Herm Fischer'" <fischer@MARKV.COM>
Benedikt; Thanks for this. What I am going to do is express a subset of SEC filings in RDF/OWL trying as best that I can to use your RDF Data Cube Vocabulary (QB). I will model the facts, fact tables, relations, business rules; basically the entire XBRL taxonomy (including XBRL Formula business rules) and XBRL instance. So, I will have three expressions of exactly the same information: 1. XBRL 2. My infosets 3. RDF Data Cube Vocabulary I then hope to leverage other information about financial reporting expressed in RDF or will express this other information in RDF and try and do something useful using Protégé. I want to be able to analyze the complete set of about 8000 SEC 10K and 10Q filings for the period ended June 30, 2012. (If the XBRL International Abstract Model is ready by then, I will add that to the list) I will make all of this publically available. That should help us figure this stuff out. Cheers, Charlie -----Original Message----- From: Benedikt Kämpgen [mailto:kaempgen@fzi.de] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 9:17 AM To: 'Charles Hoffman'; 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; public-gld-comments@w3.org Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data section of Linked Data Cookbook Dear Charles, > If you > know someone who might be able to provide some guidance as to what the > RDF/OWL would look like (I want to provide a good example), I would be > happy to take their guidance in creating such a prototype. We have tried to create such a prototype with the Edgar Linked Data Wrapper [1]. It uses the Google App Engine, Java, and XSLT-Sheets to make available XBRL filings as Linked Data. As an example, take an XBRL filing of RAYONIER INC disclosing a sales revenue net of 377,515,000 USD from 2010-07-01 to 2010-09-30 [2]. As Linked Data published by Edgar Linked Data Wrapper, this filing is represented by a URI: [3]. If you open this URL with a browser you get the RDF representation of that filing. The RDF representation reuses the RDF Data Cube Vocabulary (QB). Modeled using QB, a filing is basically a dataset with facts. For instance, "RAYONIER INC disclosing a sales revenue net of 377,515,000 USD from 2010-07-01 to 2010-09-30" is represented as follows in RDF. Note the different dimensions of the fact, subject (financial concept), dtstart, dtend (period), issuer (filing company), and the measure (observation value). <rdf:Description rdf:about="#ds"> <rdfs:seeAlso> <qb:Observation> <qb:dataSet rdf:resource="#ds"/> <ed:subject rdf:resource="http://edgarwrap.ontologycentral.com/vocab/us-gaap-2009-01-31# SalesRevenueNet"/> <sdmx-measure:obsValue>377515000</sdmx-measure:obsValue> <ical:dtstart>2010-07-01</ical:dtstart> <ical:dtend>2010-09-30</ical:dtend> <ed:issuer rdf:resource="../../cik/52827#id"/> </qb:Observation></rdfs:seeAlso></rdf:Description> This example is the best recommendation I can give you, at the moment. Certainly, the model can be improved; for instance, it does not make explicit typed and explicit axes and attributes such as the conversion unit; it also does not reflect taxonomies or linkbases, yet. But we were able to use this model in our FIOS demo [4]. The model is a start which - if time permits - we would be happy to improve upon. Last week at the weekly telecon of the GLD Working Group, I gave a presentation about making XBRL and Linked Data interoperable. We were discussing about having XBRL as a use case for our work on the RDF Data Cube Vocabulary. So far, no decision has been made. If you are interested, see attached the presentation. Best, Benedikt [1] <http://edgarwrap.ontologycentral.com/> [2] <http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/52827/000119312510238973/0001193125- 10-238973-index.htm> [3] <http://edgarwrap.ontologycentral.com/archive/52827/0001193125-10-238973#ds> [4] <http://xbrl.us/research/appdev/pages/275.aspx#> -- AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Phone: +49 721 608-47946 Email: benedikt.kaempgen@kit.edu Web: http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Hauptseite/en > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Hoffman [mailto:CharlesHoffman@olywa.net] > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 4:47 PM > To: 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; public-gld-comments@w3.org > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data > section of > Linked Data Cookbook > > Benedikt; > > Seems like we are on the same page. > > I agree with you that the RDF/OWL I showed you does not reflect an > entire SEC financial filing. I am moving slowly in that direction > only because I don’t > know RDF/OWL. I am working with someone now who understands modeling, > but they likewise are not that experience with RDF/OWL. If you know > someone who might be able to provide some guidance as to what the > RDF/OWL would look like (I want to provide a good example), I would be > happy to take their guidance in creating such a prototype. > > When I get the RDF/OWL model correctly reconciled to my model, I can > (and > will) get the entire set of SEC XBRL financial reports generated in > that format. > It will just be a matter of creating a few style sheets which converts > my existing model to the RDF/OWL output format. That is exactly what > I am doing now to get to my model. I am using someone else's model, > using style > sheets to convert it to my model. > > The model is not the problem, I am 100% confident that (a) I > understand the > financial report model and (b) that model works with 100% of SEC XBRL > financial filings. My model was actually created using many, many > inputs (i.e. > it was not me who came up with the model, I just put all the pieces > together). > > I think this would be a great exercise and would provide a boat load > of useful > RDF/OWL for people to play with, particularly starting in July when > 100% of > SEC filers are providing detail in XBRL. > > I figure that converting my models to RDF/OWL would take less than a > day if > the person doing it understands the goal is to simply convert my > model; not > discuss what the model should be. If desired, we could then adjust my > model as a second step, correcting any errors. > > Cheers, > > Charlie > > -----Original Message----- > From: Benedikt Kämpgen [mailto:kaempgen@fzi.de] > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 7:16 AM > To: 'Charles Hoffman'; 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; > public-gld- comments@w3.org > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data > section of > Linked Data Cookbook > > Dear Charles, > > > That RDF stuff you sent me (http://edgarwrap.ontologycentral.com/) > > is awesome!!! > Great. We can give you more information about this prototype, if you want. > > > With all due respect, I believe you are misinterpreting what I am > > sending you or something. The infosets I sent to you have 100% of > > the properties you need to interpret the data 100% correctly. > > Actually, that is not totally true, I did not provide you with the > > business rules > infoset. > > Whether my infoset is best or has the right information is really > > not the correct discussion as I see it. This was the discussion I > > was trying to have, I have condensed it into bullet points. > I think, I have quite a clear picture of what you sent around; I also think, we > have the same opinions. Only, let me maybe put my point differently: > > You linked to two XML files: > > * Ontology for Digital Financial Report: > http://www.xbrlsite.com/DigitalFinancialReporting/Ontologies/2012-04- > 15/Digi > talFinancialReport.xml > * Ontology for Multidimensional Model: > http://www.xbrlsite.com/DigitalFinancialReporting/Ontologies/Multidime > nsi > ona > lModel.xml > > I think they are a great start, but I am wondering how these two XML > files can be used to represent a concrete XBRL filing or XBRL > taxonomy. I haven't > found any examples. > > > This thread started because I pointed out that the Government Linked > > Data Working Group "Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data" > > > (http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Linked_Data_Cookbook#Ingredients_for > > _High_Q > > uality_Linked_Data) had nothing in the list which says "verify that > > the > data > > you are making available as linked data is correct and make those > > business rules available." > Understood. The paper on "Using SPIN to Formalise Accounting > Regulations on the Semantic Web" I mentioned presents a way to > represent (and even to > execute) those business rules for consistency checks on financial > reports in > RDF. Yet, you are right, business rules is something we could expand > in the > Linked Data Cookbook. > > As far as the the RDF Data Cube vocabulary (QB) standard alone is concerned, > business rules are probably out-of-scope, since QB aims at a generally > applicable way to represent statistics (such as contained in financial reports), > and as such focuses more on interoperability and exchange, than on > consistency checks and automatic inferencing of additional statistics. > Still, representing XBRL information as Linked Data may be a nice use > case for > QB. > > Thanks for summarising our discussion. > > Best, > > Benedikt > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Charles Hoffman [mailto:CharlesHoffman@olywa.net] > > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 4:36 PM > > To: 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; public-gld-comments@w3.org > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data > > section > of > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > Benedikt; > > > > That RDF stuff you sent me (http://edgarwrap.ontologycentral.com/) > > is awesome!!! > > > > With all due respect, I believe you are misinterpreting what I am > > sending you or something. The infosets I sent to you have 100% of > > the properties you need to interpret the data 100% correctly. > > Actually, that is not totally true, I did not provide you with the > > business rules > infoset. > > > > Whether my infoset is best or has the right information is really > > not the correct discussion as I see it. This was the discussion I > > was trying to have, I have condensed it into bullet points. > > > > Respectfully, I would hold the following out as facts: > > > > 1. Some people use XBRL (i.e. the SEC), some people use RDF (i.e. > > your RDF demo), some people use proprietary XML (my infoset) to > > express financial information. This is syntax. > > > > 2. XBRL, RDF, and other expressions of the same financial > > information > should > > mean EXACTLY the same thing semantically. > > > > 3. XBRL has a business rules engine built it which can be used to > > verify information expressed in the XBRL technical syntax. > > Proprietary XML does not and RDF does not have that capability either. > > However, you could express the business rule information in XML or RDF. > > > > 4. If RDF and any proprietary XML has the same semantics and all the > > appropriate properties are expressed, one can convert RDF to XBRL > > and use an XBRL processor to verify information; or convert any > > proprietary XML > format > > into XBRL and use an XBRL processor to verify the information. > > > > 5. This ability to convert from the RDF technical syntax or any > > other proprietary XML technical syntax to/from XBRL is both useful > > and > desirable. > > > > 6. The ONLY think necessary to achieve number "5" above is an > > understanding of the semantics. > > > > THAT is why XBRL International needs to document those semantics. > > That is why I got David Frankel on this thread, that is what he is > > trying to > do. > > > > Personally, I believe that RDF is more important than XBRL because > > RDF is > a > > W3C standard. The fact is when XBRL first started, they considered > > using RDF to express what has been expressed using XBRL but RDF was > > not mature enough at that time. > > > > This thread started because I pointed out that the Government Linked > > Data Working Group "Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data" > > > (http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Linked_Data_Cookbook#Ingredients_for > > _High_Q > > uality_Linked_Data) had nothing in the list which says "verify that > > the > data > > you are making available as linked data is correct and make those > > business rules available." > > > > I think that would be a good addition to your ingredients and it > > would > help > > XBRL and RDF be interoperable. That is an ingredient which I use > > for my XBRL-based information and those infosets (which is just an > > easier to use form of exactly the same information expressed in XBRL). > > > > I say this as a CPA and accountant who understands the importance of > > making sure that things "tick and tie", "cross cast and foot". That > > is a > business > > requirement, a business use case in general and it is absolutely a > business > > requirement for financial information. I pointed out the example of > > the > US > > Census Bureau making information available which was incorrect, and > > they did not even know that it was incorrect. I found that it was > > incorrect by checking my instantiation of that data in XBRL. > > > > So, that is what I am trying to say. Which, if any, of those points > > would you disagree with? > > > > Cheers, > > > > Charlie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Benedikt Kämpgen [mailto:kaempgen@fzi.de] > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:20 PM > > To: 'Charles Hoffman'; 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; > > public-gld-comments@w3.org > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data > > section > of > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > Dear Charlie, > > > > Thank you for this discussion. > > > > I was not referring to your semantic model/reference implementation. > > I meant the ontology at [1] which describes well classes of a > > multidimensional > model > > but does not define object properties between instances of such classes. > > This would render representation of XBRL filings or taxonomies > > reusing the ontology difficult. For instance, how could one describe > > that a dimension > is > > part of a specific hypercube or that a fact has a specific dimension > > and member? > > > > The RDF Data Cube Vocabulary (QB) includes such properties to fully > > represent a multidimensional model. I would be happy to explain the > > correspondence to you in more detail if you like. Also, we have > > published > a > > paper on mapping QB and a multidimensional model [2]. > > > > Thanks for the pointer to your new ontology [3], which is more > > specific to financial reporting than the previous ontology and which > > introduces > classes > > of the Financial Report Semantics and Dynamics Theory. However, > > describing instances of filings (or even taxonomies) would again be > > difficult, since the ontology is missing object properties. > > > > Maybe you are interested in how we are currently describing XBRL > > filings using QB. The Edgar Linked Data Wrapper [4] translates > > filings from the > SEC > > on-the-fly into Linked Data. See [5] for an example filing. Besides > > QB, we are reusing other ontologies, e.g., RDFS (just like you), and > > SKOS [7]. If you are wondering about the difference between Linked > > Data and OWL, Linked Data (see [6] for a description by Tim > > Berners-Lee) refers to general best practices of making RDF > > available on the Web, whereas OWL is one specific ontology language > > that can also be represented in RDF. > > > > Already quite a few ontologies/vocabularies to describe XBRL > > filings/taxonomies can be found in the literature, but maybe none of > > them does it properly. It would be great, however, if your ontology > > would be linkable to QB (or even better, reuse QB). This way, every > > application > that > > works with statistics described with QB, would also work with > > filings published using your ontology. > > > > I hope what I meant is clearer now. > > > > > Yes, there is validation software. This is an example of > > > validation which > > has > > > been run against every SEC XBRL financial filing: > > > https://edgardashboard.xbrlcloud.com/edgar-dashboard/dashboard.do > > Thanks for this interesting pointer. > > > > Best, > > > > Benedikt > > > > [1] > > <http://www.xbrlsite.com/DigitalFinancialReporting/Ontologies/Multid > > im > > en > > sion > > alModel.xml> > > [2] <http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Inproceedings3211/en> > > [3] > > <http://www.xbrlsite.com/DigitalFinancialReporting/Ontologies/2012-0 > > 4- > > 15/Dig > > italFinancialReport.xml> > > [4] <http://edgarwrap.ontologycentral.com/> > > [5] <edgarwrap.ontologycentral.com/archive/909832/0001193125-10- > > 230379#ds> > > [6] <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html> > > [7] <http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/> > > > > -- > > AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) > > Phone: +49 721 608-47946 > > Email: benedikt.kaempgen@kit.edu > > Web: http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Hauptseite/en > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Charles Hoffman [mailto:CharlesHoffman@olywa.net] > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 7:27 PM > > > To: 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; > > > public-gld-comments@w3.org > > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data > > > section > > of > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > See this blog post of mine which explains the best attempt I can > > > make at creating an RDF/OWL representation of what is in the other > > > documentation I pointed you to. > > > > > > This is the blog post (it has a graphic generated via Protégé): > > > > > > http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2012/5/10/digital-financial-re > > > po > > > rt > > > - > > > seman > > > tics-expressed-using-rdfowl.html > > > > > > This is the RDF/OWL ontology: > > > > > > http://www.xbrlsite.com/DigitalFinancialReporting/Ontologies/2012- > > > 04 > > > - > > > 15/Digi > > > talFinancialReport.xml > > > > > > This has a ways to go, but hopefully within two or three months I > > > will > > have > > > both the ontology build out more and I will have converted every > > > SEC XBRL financial filing into RDF following this ontology. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Charlie > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Charles Hoffman [mailto:CharlesHoffman@olywa.net] > > > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 8:46 AM > > > To: 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; 'public-gld-comments@w3.org' > > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data > > > section > > of > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > Benedikt; > > > > > > Yes, there is validation software. This is an example of > > > validation which > > has > > > been run against every SEC XBRL financial filing: > > > > > > https://edgardashboard.xbrlcloud.com/edgar-dashboard/dashboard.do > > > > > > That is just scratching the surface. > > > > > > I am not sure you are seeing all the different things that the > > > model/reference implementation is achieving. There is a lot going on. > > > > > > My model is simple, but it is not simplistic. You say my model is > > > not "sufficiently detailed". What specifically can you show that > > > is > missing? > > > > > > I have run every SEC XBRL financial filing through my model for > > > each of > > the > > > 8000 or so SEC filers. Works fine. My model does not detail the > > > business rules currently, but I have that infoset also. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Charlie > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Benedikt Kämpgen [mailto:kaempgen@fzi.de] > > > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 7:20 AM > > > To: 'Charles Hoffman'; 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; > > > public-gld- comments@w3.org > > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked Data > > > section > > of > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > Dear Charlie, > > > > > > I had found these links before, but thank you very much for > > > putting them into context for me. > > > > > > Regarding your reference implementation of a SEC filing, including > > business > > > rules etc. [1]: This is a comprehensive description in HTML and > > > XML of how one valid filing can be composed into its many parts, > > > and validated. I am wondering whether there is a description (or > > > even > > > software) to > > automatically > > > retrieve and validate this kind of information from any filing. If > > > there > > were, I > > > could try to understand it and try to do a mapping to a Linked > > > Data representation. > > > > > > Regarding your efforts in aligning XBRL with a common > > > multidimensional model > > > [2]: Your ontology [3] is a nice start but I think that filings > > > cannot be sufficiently detailed described with it to be of use for > applications. > > XBRL > > > Dimensions (Herm Fischer) [4] and the XBRL Abstract Model [5] > > > (David > > > Frankel) go into much more detail, and I see a lot of > > > correspondences to > > the > > > RDF Data Cube Vocabulary (QB); yet, making the models work > > > together technically and semantically, would require some thinking. > > > > > > Regarding use cases: The standardization of a Linked Data > > > vocabulary > > typically > > > is mainly driven by requirements and issues that have been derived > > > from concrete use cases. Just "aligning XBRL and QB" might be too > > > fuzzy. Our > > XBRL > > > submission [6] might describe a use case, but I guess, the more > > real-world- > > > motivated a use case, the better. > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Benedikt > > > > > > > > > [1] <http://www.xbrlsite.com/2012/ReferenceImplementation/2012-04- > > > 15/> > > > [2] > > > <http://digitalfinancialreporting.wikispaces.com/Multidimensional+ > > > Mo > > > de > > > l> > > > [3] > > > <http://www.xbrlsite.com/DigitalFinancialReporting/Ontologies/Mult > > > id > > > im > > > en > > > sion > > > alModel.xml> > > > [4] > > > <http://www.xbrl.org/Specification/XDT-REC-2006-09-18+Corrected-Er > > > ra > > > ta > > > - > > > 2009- > > > 09-07.htm> > > > [5] > > > <http://xbrl.org/Specification/abstractmodel-primary/PWD-2011-10- > > > 19/abstract > > > model-primary-PWD-2011-10-19.html> > > > [6] <http://xbrl.us/research/appdev/pages/275.aspx#> > > > > > > -- > > > AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) > > > Phone: +49 721 608-47946 > > > Email: benedikt.kaempgen@kit.edu > > > Web: http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Hauptseite/en > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Charles Hoffman [mailto:CharlesHoffman@olywa.net] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:35 PM > > > > To: 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; 'Frankel, David'; > > > > public-gld-comments@w3.org > > > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; 'Herm Fischer' > > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked > > > > Data section > > > of > > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > > > Benedikt > > > > > > > > In terms of the difficulties in retrieving all linkbase > > > > information from > > > the > > > > filings and taxonomies; I have distilled SEC filings down to a > > > > set of easy > > > to > > > > understand infosets. The infosets represent the data model semantics. > > > > You can get all this information here: > > > > > > > > http://www.xbrlsite.com/2012/ReferenceImplementation/2012-04-15/ > > > > > > > > In particular, this is the fact table infoset: > > > > > > > > XML: > > > > http://www.xbrlsite.com/2012/ReferenceImplementation/2012-04- > > > 15/abc- > > > > 20101231 > > > > _FactTable_SEC.xml > > > > HTML: > > > > http://www.xbrlsite.com/2012/ReferenceImplementation/2012-04- > > > > 15_Verification > > > > /Viewer.html (Go to the individual "Fact Tables" for the components). > > > > > > > > This is the relations infoset: > > > > > > > > XML: > > > > http://www.xbrlsite.com/2012/ReferenceImplementation/2012-04- > > > 15/abc- > > > > 20101231 > > > > _Relations_SEC.xml > > > > HTML: > > > > http://www.xbrlsite.com/2012/ReferenceImplementation/2012-04- > > > 15/abc- > > > > 20101231 > > > > _Relations.html > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a lot more to all this, all is explained here if you > > > > are > > > > interested: > > > > > > > > http://xbrl.squarespace.com/digital-financial-reporting/ > > > > > > > > Basically, you can work with all this "stuff" semantically at > > > > the report > > > level. > > > > No need to even understand the XBRL technical syntax, focus on > > > > the report semantics. Dave Frankel is developing something > > > > similar in a more > > > official > > > > format. But, I know my model works; it is tested against > > > > thousands and thousands of SEC filings. If my model works with > > > > your model I am quite confident that your model, my model, > > > > Dave's model, XBRL, can be made 100% interoperable. > > > > > > > > If you need any additional information of test cases, be sure to > > > > let me > > > know. > > > > I don’t know what you desire in terms of a business use case, > > > > but I have business use cases "coming out of my ears". > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Charlie > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Benedikt Kämpgen [mailto:kaempgen@fzi.de] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 2:32 AM > > > > To: 'Frankel, David'; Charles Hoffman; 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; > > > > public-gld- comments@w3.org > > > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; Herm Fischer > > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked > > > > Data section > > > of > > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > > > Dear Charles, Dear David, > > > > > > > > Thanks for your messages and your exciting thoughts about making > > > > the RDF Data Cube vocabulary (QB), XBRL, and CWM interoperable. > > > > > > > > > What I believe would be a good thing is if your data cube, > > > > > XBRL's data > > > > cube, > > > > > and the CWM data cube were 100% semantically interoperable. > > > > I would agree. But there is probably some alignment work to do: > > > > For instance, when translating XBRL into QB [1] we had > > > > difficulties in > > > retrieving all > > > > linkbase information from the filings and taxonomies (e.g., > > > > concept hierarchies and calculation arcs) and representing them > > > > in > RDF. > > > > Also, I am aware of the CWM multidimensional model and would be > > > > interested in how it can be extended for sharing > > > > multidimensional > data. > > > > > > > > > other data stores and metadata to XBRL. I'm cc'ing Herm > > > > > Fischer, who is a key person in our current effort to raise > > > > > the level of abstraction at > > > > which > > > > > XBRL report design and creation operates, and who is doing > > > > > some prototyping around the use of linked data with XBRL. > > > > Since we have been working on using XBRL with Linked Data [1], I > > > > would be happy to give feedback on your prototypes. > > > > > > > > > Formula). Business rules provides important functionality to > > > > > the sorts of things XBRL does with financial reporting (making > > > > > sure the information is > > > > > correct) and I believe that this same functionality is > > > > > necessary for > > > > quality > > > > > business reporting of any kind; financial, nonfinancial, > > > > > government, industry, anything. > > > > Regarding business rules, we are considering refining QB to more > > > > formally define relationships between data cubes (e.g., > > > > aggregations), which may help to represent more complex formulae > > > > or business rules using > > > QB data. > > > > > > > > > The question is how to put all these things together? > > > > One way to start this effort would be to define a use case > > > > around XBRL, QB and possibly CWM, which could help to derive > > > > requirements for them to become interoperable. Some proposed use > > > > cases for QB are available > > > at [2]. > > > > Their technical detail varies, but in general they should give > > > > an overview > > > of > > > > what QB (e.g., together with XBRL, CWM) may allow to do. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Benedikt > > > > > > > > [1] <http://xbrl.us/research/appdev/pages/275.aspx#> > > > > [2] > > > <http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Data_Cube_Vocabulary/Use_Cases> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) > > > > Phone: +49 721 608-47946 > > > > Email: benedikt.kaempgen@kit.edu > > > > Web: http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Hauptseite/en > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Frankel, David [mailto:david.frankel@sap.com] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:13 PM > > > > > To: Charles Hoffman; 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; > > > > > public-gld-comments@w3.org > > > > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; Herm Fischer > > > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked > > > > > Data section > > > > of > > > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Charlie. I consider linked data to be important for > > > > > semantic federation of the various XBRL taxonomies and report > > > > > data, and for linking other data stores and metadata to XBRL. > > > > > I'm cc'ing Herm Fischer, who is a key person in our current > > > > > effort to raise the level of abstraction at > > > > which > > > > > XBRL report design and creation operates, and who is doing > > > > > some prototyping around the use of linked data with XBRL. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > --David > > > > > > > > > > David S. Frankel > > > > > Standards and Open Source Strategy Technology and Innovation > > > > > Platform Group SAP Labs LLC; Palo Alto, California USA Phone & > > > > > Cell +1 530 591-0212 > > > > > Email: david.frankel@sap.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Charles Hoffman [mailto:CharlesHoffman@olywa.net] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 8:51 AM > > > > > To: 'Benedikt Kämpgen'; public-gld-comments@w3.org > > > > > Cc: 'O'Riain, Sean'; 'Andreas Harth'; Frankel, David > > > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked > > > > > Data section > > > > of > > > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > > > > > Benedikt; > > > > > > > > > > (I added David Frankel to this list, you will see why in a > > > > > moment as you read. David, you will likewise understand, > > > > > please read this > > > > > thread.) > > > > > > > > > > Your RDF Data Cube Vocabulary is right on target in my view. > > > > > There is a group within the XBRL community which is modeling > > > > > something similar for XBRL. David Frankel is leading that effort. > > > > > David can explain this better, but in short as I understand > > > > > it; XBRL is trying to leverage the work of > > > > the > > > > > on CWM, Common Warehouse Metamodel: > > > > > http://www.omg.org/spec/CWM/ > > > > > > > > > > What I believe would be a good thing is if your data cube, > > > > > XBRL's data > > > > cube, > > > > > and the CWM data cube were 100% semantically interoperable. > > > > > > > > > > The second thing is that XBRL has a business rules language > > > > > (XBRL > > > > > Formula) and business rules engines (part of an XBRL processor > > > > > which implements XBRL Formula). Business rules provides > > > > > important functionality to the sorts of things XBRL does with > > > > > financial reporting (making sure the information is > > > > > correct) and I believe that this same functionality is > > > > > necessary for > > > > quality > > > > > business reporting of any kind; financial, nonfinancial, > > > > > government, industry, anything. > > > > > > > > > > The question is how to put all these things together? We have > > > > > the Government Linked Data Working Group, Data Transparency > > > > > Coalition > > > > > (http://datacoalition.org/) pushing on the DATA Act > > > > > (http://keepthewebopen.com/data). We have the ADMS folks in > > > > > Europe pushing more on semantics > > > > > (https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/adms/home) and I am sure I > > > > > left a few out. > > > > > > > > > > How do we make all these things "play well" together and serve > > > > > government and business well, globally? > > > > > > > > > > So basically, that is my view. XBRL and your RDF Data Cube > > > > > Vocabulary should be interoperable. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure you and David will have a lot to talk about! > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > Charlie > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Benedikt Kämpgen [mailto:kaempgen@fzi.de] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 2:41 AM > > > > > To: 'Charles Hoffman'; public-gld-comments@w3.org > > > > > Cc: O'Riain, Sean; 'Andreas Harth' > > > > > Subject: RE: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked > > > > > Data section > > > > of > > > > > Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > > > > > Dear Charles Hoffman, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your recommendation to look more closely into XBRL, > > > > > for instance, w.r.t. the application of business rules on > > > > > Linked > Data. > > > > > > > > > > What may be of interest in this regard: > > > > > > > > > > 1) In GLD, we are considering to add XBRL use cases to the > > > > > development of the "RDF Data Cube Vocabulary" (QB) for > > > > > publishing statistics (such as financial disclosures). See [1] > > > > > for the current > > > vocabulary QB. > > > > > Examples of possible use cases: > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Colleagues and I have used QB at [2] (an XBRL challenge > > > > > submission) > > > > to > > > > > publish XBRL filings from SEC as Linked Data and to consume > > > > > those filings using Online Analytical Processing. > > > > > > > > > > 1.2) At [3] of our current QB use case document (not official, > > > > > reviewed or published), a possible use case (UC 10) is > > > > > described that transforms financial statistics as Linked Data > > > > > reusing QB into > > > XBRL. > > > > > > > > > > 2) There will be a paper on using rules on financial Linked > > > > > Data (XBRL as Linked Data) in the FEOSW workshop at ESWC 2012 > > > > > [4] > > > > > > > > > > I would be happy to hear your opinion about using XBRL in use > > > > > cases of the RDF Data Cube Vocabulary. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > > > Benedikt > > > > > > > > > > [1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-vocab-data-cube-20120405/> > > > > > [2] <http://xbrl.us/research/appdev/pages/275.aspx#> > > > > > [3] > > > > > <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/data-cube- > > > > > ucr/index.html#transfo > > > > > rming-published-statistics-into-xbrl--uc-10> > > > > > [4] <http://nadir.uc3m.es/feosw2012/#ui-tabs-9> > > > > > Title: Using SPIN to Formalise Accounting Regulations on the > > > > > Semantic Web > > > > > > > > > > Authors: Dennis Spohr, Philipp Cimiano, John McCrae and Seán > > > > > O'Riain > > > > > > > > > > Abstract: > > > > > The eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) has > > > > > standardised financial reporting and provide a > > > > > machine-interpretable format that makes financial and business > > > > > reports easier to access and > > consume. > > > > > Leveraging XBRL with Open Linked Data for purposes such as > > > > > multi- dimensional regulatory querying and investigation > > > > > requires XBRL formulisation as RDF. > > > > > This paper investigates the use of of-the-shelf Semantic Web > > > > > technologies > > > > to > > > > > formulise accounting regulations specified in XBRL > > > > > jurisdictional taxonomies. Specifically the use of the SPARQL > > > > > Inferencing Notation > > > > > (SPIN) with RDF to represent these accounting regulations as > > > > > rule constraints, > > > > not > > > > > cater for in the RDF abstract model is investigated. We move > > > > > beyond previous RDF to XBRL transformations and investigate > > > > > how SPIN enhanced formalisation enables inferencing of > > > > > financial statement facts associated with financial reporting > > > > > concepts and sophisticated consistency checks, which evaluate > > > > the > > > > > correctness of reported financial data with respect to the > > > > > calculation requirements imposed by accounting regulation. The > > > > > approach illustrated through two use cases demonstrates the > > > > > use of SPIN to meet central requirements for financial data > > > > > and regulatory > > > modelling. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) > > > > > Phone: +49 721 608-47946 > > > > > Email: benedikt.kaempgen@kit.edu > > > > > Web: http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Hauptseite/en > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Charles Hoffman [mailto:CharlesHoffman@olywa.net] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 4:28 PM > > > > > > To: public-gld-comments@w3.org > > > > > > Subject: Feedback on Ingredients for High Quality Linked > > > > > > Data section of Linked Data Cookbook > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a great working group, nicely organized. In > > > > > > particular the Linked > > > > > Data > > > > > > Cookbook is quite useful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I do have some feedback for the High Quality Linked Data > > > > > > section of that Linked Data Cookbook. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is my view that one thing missing from the list of items > > > > > > necessary for > > > > > high > > > > > > quality linked data is business rules. In particular > > > > > > computations or > > > > > relations > > > > > > between information items. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a very good summary/example of what I am taking > > > > > > about and way I have this position: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://xbrl.squarespace.com/journal/2010/5/27/census-bureau- > > > > > > co > > > > > > nf > > > > > > ir > > > > > > ms > > > > > > - > > > > > > error-revises-data-set.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The cliff notes are that the US Census Bureau published > > > > > > data, the format > > > > > was > > > > > > CSV. If the data were in RDF, the same issue would exist. > > > > > > The data had > > > > > an > > > > > > error in it. It was not until I created business rules to > > > > > > be sure that my > > > > > use of > > > > > > the data was correct that I discovered an error in the US > > > > > > Census > > data. > > > > > > I > > > > > found > > > > > > this error because I wanted to be sure the XBRL information > > > > > > I was creating was correct. As such, I created business > > > > > > rules, using XBRL, to verify that > > > > > my > > > > > > data set was correct. And that is how I found the error. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Said another way, if the data set had business rules > > > > > > provided WITH the > > > > > data > > > > > > set, then (a) those providing the data would have become > > > > > > aware of the > > > > > error > > > > > > and (b) those using the data could both better understand > > > > > > the > > > > > relationships > > > > > > because they are articulated and they can validate the > > > > > > information prior > > > > > to > > > > > > use to confirm that there is no error. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for considering this feedback. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Charles Hoffman, CPA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 15:37:52 UTC