[DDI-SRG] TC: Agenda for Thursday with CV

Thu Mar 14 10:10:17 EDT 2019

Hi Taina,

In this sense, it might be best that Carsten, Claus-Peter, TC people including myself, and you and Sanda are meeting to discuss all CV related issues. Otherwise, there could be the risk that a perspective is missing.

Today, I have no time.

Wendy:
Could the next week's TC meeting used for this?

Achim

From: Taina Jääskeläinen (TAU) [mailto:taina.jaaskelainen at tuni.fi]
Sent: Mittwoch, 13. März 2019 18:24
To: Wackerow, Joachim; Wendy Thomas
Cc: DDI Structural Reform Working Group.; Sanda Ionescu
Subject: Re: [DDI-SRG] TC: Agenda for Thursday with CV

Hi Achim,

would you be able to attend the TC meeting tomorrow? It would be really good to have this straightened out.

It may be my mistake that I could not explain why the language tags in urns are not a good idea. CESSDA does not have any desire to for individual policy in this.

The language versions are all in the same document. See

https://cv-dev.cessda.eu/cvmanager/#!detail/TypeOfInstrument?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ddialliance.org%2FSpecification%2FDDI-CV%2FTypeOfInstrument%2Fen%2F2.2

cessda

CESSDA2018

- You need to make an exception to enter.

The canonical URI is the same for all languages, see Identity and general tab.

The question concerned the Canonical uri of the version, which can be seen in citation. Its production is not yet machine-produced, this is why Canonical uri of the version is as yet missing from the  Identity and general tab. In this urn the developer wished to have a language tag there, and I did not know what to answer.

We also need to finalise machine-produced citation in the tool (can be manually edited as well). The user group asked the non-language specific urn of the version to be used in citation in all languages, as previously discussed. Therefore it seemed to me that we are going to run into trouble if we have language tags in it.

I would be good for tech people discuss this among themselves, just as long as you tell the user group the conclusion and we can write the User Guide accordingly.

All the best, Taina

________________________________
From: Wackerow, Joachim <Joachim.Wackerow at gesis.org>
Sent: 13 March 2019 18:23:20
To: Wendy Thomas
Cc: DDI Structural Reform Working Group.; Sanda Ionescu; Taina Jääskeläinen (TAU)
Subject: RE: [DDI-SRG] TC: Agenda for Thursday with CV

Taina,

I recommend that some technical person from CESSDA should look at this. It doesn't really make sense that CESSDA wants to go another way as what is common practice in the Web and the Semantic Web.

I think Carsten Thiel and Claus-Peter Klas are the appropriate people for this. I'm happy to talk to them in case they have questions.

Achim

From: ddi-srg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu [mailto:ddi-srg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Thomas
Sent: Mittwoch, 13. März 2019 17:01
To: Wackerow, Joachim
Cc: DDI Structural Reform Working Group.; Sanda Ionescu; Taina Jääskeläinen (TAU)
Subject: Re: [DDI-SRG] TC: Agenda for Thursday with CV

Achim,

Thanks for the back ground information on this. It is what has been agreed in the original production of CVs and was also noted in the work done in Dagstuhl. I realize that CESSDA views this differently but what you've stated is absolutely correct. There is a CV with terms and then descriptions/labels in multiple languages which can be selected during negotiation during resolution.

Wendy

On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 10:45 AM Wackerow, Joachim <Joachim.Wackerow at gesis.org<mailto:Joachim.Wackerow at gesis.org>> wrote:

Re: English CV version

A CV should have ideally all available languages in one document. The language is only applied to the description part. The code and the official English definition is the core of the CV. (Adding more languages to one document should result in a new (possibly minor) version of the document).

Therefore I'm not sure why there should be multiple CV documents (for each language each).

SKOS, which is used for this, is able - as any RDF document - to express multiple languages for descriptions in one RDF document.

Even, if one thinks theoretically on multiple resources (one for each language), there is a an acknowledged way in the web to deal with this. It is called HTTP content negotiation. The idea is that a resource (with all available versions) has one identifier. The request should express by a HTTP header which version is desired. The server can deliver the specific version if available otherwise a generic version.

Further information available at: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Accept-Language, https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Language.

Achim

From: ddi-srg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu<mailto:ddi-srg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu> [mailto:ddi-srg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu<mailto:ddi-srg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu>] On Behalf Of Wendy Thomas
Sent: Mittwoch, 13. März 2019 16:10
To: DDI Structural Reform Working Group.; Taina Jääskeläinen (TAU); Sanda Ionescu
Subject: [DDI-SRG] TC: Agenda for Thursday with CV

NOTE TIME: Due to North America going on DST before Europe

8:00 US Pacific

10:00 US Central

11:00 US Easter

15:00 UK

16:00 Central Europe

17:00 Eastern Europe

Sorry for not getting this out sooner...I've been down with cold. Taina and I hope Sanda will be joining us to discuss what needs to be done in TC to support CV work.

Taina has provided the following list of topics:

-  Does the DDI Alliance want to publish the translations of the CVs as well as the source CVs? That would require changes in the website. If not,  I think there should be a reference to the CESSDA Vocabulary Service CV which has the translations. And even if yes, a reference anyway?

-  On the DDI Alliance website, the different location URIs of different vocabulary formats take too much space. Can this be amended, for example, by presenting a button for each format?

-  URN: at present the 'Canonical URI of this version' element (=urn of the version) does not have a language tag. The IT people for the CESSDA tool say they would like also the source vocabulary have a language tag. This would mean that the urn of the English CV version would be:
urn:ddi:int.ddi.cv:TypeOfInstrument:2.0-en.
Is this OK?

-  The tool produces a citation which does not exist in CVs now published on the DDI Alliance website. What to do with this in data transfer?

-  Usage information may be presented differently, can the publication pipeline just publish whatever is there in the CVs in the CESSDA tool? Module/attribute/element names will be there with a link to the specification, as well as element numbers for DDI2 but no definitions of the element as now in DDI website.

-  The tool will automatically assign the publication year as the copyright year. For all CVs published from the CESSDA tool, it will be the current year, be the CV old or new.

-  Urn resolver planned for DDI?

--

Wendy L. Thomas                              Phone: +1 612.624.4389

Data Access Core Director                 Fax:   +1 612.626.8375

Minnesota Population Center             Email: wlt at umn.edu<mailto:wlt at umn.edu>

University of Minnesota

50 Willey Hall

225 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

--

Wendy L. Thomas                              Phone: +1 612.624.4389

Data Access Core Director                 Fax:   +1 612.626.8375

Minnesota Population Center             Email: wlt at umn.edu<mailto:wlt at umn.edu>

University of Minnesota

50 Willey Hall

225 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-srg/attachments/20190314/b7f0e860/attachment-0001.html 