Re: Requirement for 3W interop standard (new proposed schema attached)

Hi Mandana,

Thanks again for taking the initiative on this valuable exercise. As
requested here is the relevant Sahana Schema (SQL) in a  PDF. Let me know if
you need more data.

Chamindra

On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Mandana Sotoodeh <mandanas@ece.ubc.ca>wrote:

>
> Hi Paolo and all,
>
> Thanks for the attachment and your comment. I believe these are updated
> diagrams (comparing to what is in the functional schema) . If they are, we
> may need to upload it to wiki to complement OCHA functional specification.
>
> My understanding is to use the existing models to come up with a more
> general and encompassing model. OCHA and Sahana have assumptions ( in terms
> of goals, scope of activities, focusing on a particular disaster phase or
> across phases, or the users) based on which the schema may form one way or
> another. The comparison will help to explore those assumptions. This will
> help us to define the scope of our work in the disaster domain as well.
>
> I am going to compile some issues. If any of these are correct, then
> ideally the model should be able to address them no matter how OCHA or
> Sahana does it (to my humble opinion).
>
> 1- Organization like Red Cross may set up local offices depending on the
> type of activities or given emergency. However could we have independent
> local offices which participate in an activity,  for example, by providing
> fund or resources such as people? Could we have one entity to represent both
> kinds? If yes, then we may need the schema to allow to have offices
> independent of organizations (Office may not be a good name for it). If they
> can't be the same entity, please share some use cases of how it works in
> reality.
>
> 2- Can OrgPerson represent the volunteers that join an activity on fly?
> There might be some volunteers that are available but not particularly
> assigned to any activity. Do we need different entities to represent them?
> If not, then the model should allow a contact person to be part of the staff
> or on its own. (OrgPerson is not a good name either since in that case it
> doesn't have to be attached to an organization but potentially the model
> should allow it).
>
> Paolo, are you trying to say that it would be a more accurate
> representation if we link the Contact ( which is represented here by
> OrgPerson) to Activity directly ( as a resource ) rather than to the Office?
>
> 3- The office, Contact and Activity have their own assigned locations. This
> allows to model activities that occur in a different location than the
> office executing it.  At the same time the model captures location
> information about the office as well. It also allows to have information
> about the location of contact people when they are not assigned to any
> activity.
>
> Paolo, I believe the model addresses what you mentioned. Please let me know
> if I'm still missing your point.
>
> Please provide your feedback that can be incorporated into the model.
>
> Renato: I imported the file into MS Visio but it doesn't allow me to edit
> it neatly.
>
> By the way, Chamindra,  your attachment is not readable. Would you re-send
> it (in different format maybe)?
>
> Thank you,
> Mandana
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Paolo Palmero" <palmero@un.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 1:38 PM
> To: "public-xg-eiif" <public-xg-eiif@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Requirement for 3W interop standard (new proposed schema
> attached)
>
>
>  Dear Mandana,
>>
>> The physical entity of an organization (offices) are used more with
>> relation to contacts rather than activities.   As far as activities are
>> concerned we  are generally interested in where the activity is happening
>> rather than the physical location of the organization that is executing
>> it.
>> I hope this clarifies how we use and structured the 3W. Please let us know
>> if you have any questions or need any clarifications on OCHA's 3W.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Paolo
>> (See attached file: 3w_DB_Schema_Ver_Proposed.vsd)
>>
>> Paolo Palmero
>> Information Management Officer (GIS)
>> Field Information Services Unit (AIMB)
>> United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)
>> DC1-1358, One UN Plaza,  New York, NY 10017
>> Tel: +1-917-367-5424
>> Mobile: +1-917-349-4506
>> Skype: palmerop
>> Email: palmero@un.org
>> http://ochaonline.un.org/
>>
>>
>>
>>            public-xg-eiif@w3
>>            .org
>>            Sent by:                                                   To
>>            public-xg-eiif-re         "public-xg-eiif"
>>            quest@w3.org              <public-xg-eiif@w3.org>
>>                                                                       cc
>>
>>            04-08-08 03:26                                        Subject
>>                                      Re: Requirement for 3W interop
>>                                      standard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Paola and all,
>>
>> Sounds like in OCHA schema, Organization is more of a conceptual entity
>> than physical entity (ie physically located). Offices are the ones
>> involved
>> directly in the activities and indirectly link OrgPerson to the
>> organization. However we should consider the situations where local
>> agencies help with response activities, for example, or where volunteers
>> are part of the task force. Offices work in general sectors (ie provide
>> general services) but they have specific responsibilities in the context
>> of
>> a given activities. I agree that some naming don't represent the concepts
>> very well. It would be more helpful, if you could be more specific. As we
>> get other schemas, we will refine the concepts too.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mandana,
>>
>>
>>
>> From: paola.dimaio@gmail.com
>> Sent:. Friday, August 01, 2008 8:03 PM
>> To: Mandana Sotoodeh
>> Cc: public-xg-eiif
>> Subject: Re: Requirement for 3W interop standard
>>
>> Mandana, Paolo
>>
>> Great great thanks for starting this up, it looks like there are some
>> conceptual challenges ahead
>>
>> I am looking at the diagram on the fly (did not study in depth), and have
>> a
>> few questions
>>
>> 1. I can see no link between organisation and orgperson, should there be a
>> relationship there? I am not sure if orgperson main relation should be
>> office, sound weak
>>
>> 2. does Location not have any attributes? should there be something
>> written
>> in the box
>>
>> 3. service links to orgperson with relationship -hasobjectives- not sure I
>> understand, a few other relations seem brittle
>>
>> 4. I wonder if there is a rule as to how to name in the singular/plural
>> the
>> entities and the relationships and attributes (sing or plu, should be
>> constant?), as well as the choice of names for them, if should be made
>> more
>> logical and consistent as much as possible
>> I wonder if the relationships whould have names more semantically alighed
>> with the entities they relate to, less ambiguous kind of thing
>>
>> will study further
>>
>> thanks again
>>
>> best
>>
>> PDM
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Mandana Sotoodeh <mandanas@ece.ubc.ca>
>> wrote:
>>  Hello everyone,
>>
>>  Please find the main concepts derived from OCHA schema here:
>>
>>  http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/wiki/images/7/71/W3-Model.pdf.
>>
>>  Renato kindly organized them graphically.
>>
>>  Paolo, thank you for providing the documents.
>>
>>  Your feedback is appreciated: if you have any specific scenario in mind
>>  (in the boundary of W3) that you think the model may not address well;
>>  such as volunteers or activities for day to day emergency operations
>>  (like drug abuse) as opposed to emergency response (like evacuation), or
>>  any suggestions for naming of concepts (ex. office or emergency). As we
>>  get other schemas/models, we will revise it accordingly.
>>
>>  Thanks very much,
>>
>>  Mandana
>>
>>
>>
>>  From: Renato Iannella
>>  Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 4:29 PM
>>  To: public-xg-eiif
>>  Cc: Vincent Lalieu
>>  Subject: Re: Requirement for 3W interop standard
>>
>>
>>  On 9 Jul 2008, at 18:46, Paul Currion wrote:
>>
>>       The 3W / W3 schema can be found at
>>
>>
>> http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/imtoolbox/02_Standard_Products/01_W3/3W_Tool/3wSchema2_0.pdf
>> .
>>
>>  Thanks Paul.
>>
>>  This is a good opportunity to review the Use Case [1] against the OCHA
>>  Schema and determine any gaps.
>>  Then look at the outcome and move towards defining the *core8 elements of
>>  a W3/3W "standard".
>>  Any volunteers to take this on?
>>
>>  Cheers...  Renato Iannella
>>  NICTA
>>
>>  [1] <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/wiki/WWWWCoord>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Paola Di Maio
>> School of IT
>> www.mfu.ac.th
>> *********************************************
>>
>
>
>