[DDI-users] Data Element Discussion - Mantis Issue 543 and related [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Alistair Hamilton
alistair.hamilton at abs.gov.au
Mon Mar 18 01:27:52 EDT 2013
Hi Wendy
The following are not comments, but questions (so ABS can progress to
comments).
I remember talking with Arofan many months ago and he mentioned Data
Elements were being added to DDI 3.2 to capture more "timeless" (eg don't
change from reference period to reference period) aspects of Variables.
Heather has noted that the proposed specification for Data Element has
"grown" between the PDF included in the initial release of PR documentation
(Doc1) and the latest document (Doc2) you circulated. This growth does not
appear to be simply a symptom of the Doc2 proposal aligning with Ed 3 of
11179 (for example, ValueDomain, which is in Doc2 but not Doc1, exists in
Ed 2 of 11179 also.)
Whether the Doc2 proposal is overkill depends on why Data Element is being
added to DDI and the expected use of it within DDI. The Doc1 specification
would not allow a "fully functional" 11179 Data Element to be defined
within DDI. The Doc2 specification comes a lot closer to permitting that.
Then again, we still have VariableRepresentation available for a variable.
Presumably providing relatively detailed Value Domain information for the
DataElement (eg a CodeListReference) associated with a Variable is not an
alternative to populating VariableRepresentation for the Variable itself?
I quite like the Doc1 approach (and even the DataElementConcept approach in
3.1) because if an implementer has a store outside DDI that defines and
manages DEs (DECs) fully in accordance with 11179 they can reference these
information objects from within DDI without importing too many 11179
constructs/structures into DDI itself.
If the intent were to be able to "carry around" more 11179 content within
DDI, however, then the Doc2 approach supports that.
There could be some merit to the Doc2 appropach - although it seems to
create risks of
duplication (in different forms) of information between the structural
definition of the DE and the structural definition of the Variable
the need for practice guidelines on, eg,
the level of consistency expected between the "overlapping"
structural information for CodeListReferences and
VariableRepresentations
the need for agencies who do focus on DataElements to populate the
Variable object to a level were it will be interoperable with other
DDI implementations
Was the intent of implementing DataElement in 3.2 that DDI should be able
to act as a "lite" implementation of that region of the 11179 metamodel or
was it more that content in DDI should be able to integrate with an
external implementation of that region of the 11179 metamodel?
A "sleeper" issue also may be that the DE proposal (even in the Doc1
specification potentially) carries some information that (if DDI aligns
with 11179) really belongs on an updated version of the DEC object within
DDI rather than (only) being built into the new DE object.
Cheers
Al
From: Wendy Thomas <wlt at umn.edu>
To: "DDI Structural Reform Working Group."
<ddi-srg at icpsr.umich.edu>, Data Documentation Initiative Users
Group <ddi-users at icpsr.umich.edu>, Alistair Hamilton
<alistair.hamilton at abs.gov.au>, Heather Purcell
<heather.purcell at abs.gov.au>, Tim.Dunstan at statcan.gc.ca, Dan
Gillman <gillman.daniel at bls.gov>, "Kuan, Sophia [USA]"
<kuan_sophia at bah.com>,
Date: 15/03/2013 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: Data Element Discussion - Mantis Issue 543 and related
Dear Dan G. Al, Heather, Arofan, Jeremy, Dan, Tim, Heather, and Sophia,
As a follow-up to the earlier documents trying to frame the issues
around DataElement I have read through the new edition of
ISO/IEC11179-3:2012(E) and provided a proposal for reworking
DataElement. While I don't think this is its final form, I thought
that having something concrete to react to would be useful. Please see
the new documents attached to Mantis Issue 543.
DataElementProposal_20130312.docx discribes the reasoning behind the
outline of the proposed structure
DataElementProposal.txt is a draft of an XML schema representation
(note I realize there are some style issue in this rendering..its
primarily to provide a draft to work with)
The workplan is as follows:
Provide feedback via email over the next week.
Identify at the end of that time if we need a conference call. If so
set one up for the following week.
Please note that many of us are involved in NADDI the first week of
April. As we have other issue areas that many of you are also
interested in I am hoping to get this one moving along. The intent is
not to cut short discussion, but to allow us to focus on a topic at a
time. I appreciate your attention to this. Hope to hear responses over
the next week.
Primary questions to answer include:
Does this address the issues identified in the document provided earlier?
Is it compliant with ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012(E)?
Does it meet the needs of DDI?
Is it overkill?
I expect a lively discussion :-)
Wendy
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Wendy Thomas <wlt at umn.edu> wrote:
> Dan G., Al, Heather, Arofan, Achim, Jeremy and Dan,
>
> I have tried to frame the issues regarding the introduction of a
> DataElement in DDI based on earlier discussions and a review of
> ISO/IEC 11179-3. You will find a document on Mantis Issue 543 entitled
> Purpose of DataElement in DDI.docx. Please review this document and
> make comments back to the list. There are a number of issues in 3.2PR
> that need in-depth discussion. DataElement is the first of these. Our
> intent is to begin an on-line discussion among interested parties,
> attempt to find an area of concensus and then set up conference calls
> to finalize the details. Please note that this email has been copied
> to the DDI-SRG list and DDI-Users list in order to inform others of
> this discussion and to identify persons who should be involved further
> in the discussion.
>
> To DDI-SRG and DDI-User list members: If you have a vested interest in
> how this new section of DDI is addressed in 3.2 PR, please let me know
> and I will add you to the contact list. Note that we are dealing with
> fine tuning what was proposed in DDI 3.2PR and therefore you will need
> to have a familiarity with ISO/IEC 11179-3 and/or the maintenance of
> DataElements for these discussions to be of benefit to you and to DDI.
> Having said that, I wish you to know that I am very happy to address
> any specific questions or related issues you may have with this
> discussion of DataElements.
>
> Regards
> Wendy
>
> --
> 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
> 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
University of Minnesota
50 Willey Hall
225 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free publications and statistics available on www.abs.gov.au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-users/attachments/20130318/37e5eae4/attachment.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-users/attachments/20130318/37e5eae4/attachment.gif
More information about the DDI-users
mailing list