Re: Greek and Italian Implementation experience of ORG

Many thanks for that Phil. I have updated the ORG implementations page:
http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_Implementations

Cheers,
Dave

On 08/05/13 12:59, Phil Archer wrote:
> Dave,
>
> I promised you some pointers to implementation experience of ORG.
> There's a report available at [1] but what I think will be of most
> direct interest to you will be the implementation itself at [2]. That
> was a small scale pilot we did in the ISA Programme as a test to see how
> practical it would be to generate organogram data. We had a very small
> amount of data from the Greek ministry.
>
> I then compared what I'd done with what the Italian Digital Agency had
> done. That's all available at [3].
>
> What Giorgia Lodi did in Italy, and what I found I needed to do
> immediately, was to create a mini ontology of government department
> types. What is a Ministry? A department? An Agency etc. The problem is
> that Italian and Greek classifications are not the same - and they'll be
> different everywhere else too. So for actual interoperability we'd need
> each public administration to classify themselves against a common vocab
> like COFOG - which they don't typically do.
>
> Basic conclusion from both Greek and Italian data: ORG is definitely fit
> for purpose as far as we took it. Two people working independently in
> different countries used the vocab in the same way. Perhaps out of scope
> for our purposes in W3C though is that this does NOT confer a high level
> of interoperability. That requires more data than is typically available.
>
> HTH
>
> Phil.
>
>
> [1]
> http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/core_business/document/organization-ontology-pilot-linking-public-sectors-organisational-data
>
>
> [2] http://org.testproject.eu/MAREG/
>
> [3] http://spcdata.digitpa.gov.it/dataIPA.html
>

Received on Wednesday, 8 May 2013 15:08:38 UTC