Focusing on the generalization of concepts, functionality, and overall processes involved in the creation of a secure 'network of trusted data' , the IDS-RAM resides at a higher abstraction level than common architecture models of concrete software solutions do. The document provides an overview and dedicated architecture specifications.
Please describe which content you would expect here and tell us how to solve this request
in the "Business Area" of Public Sector, and more specifically in the Business Case of Public Administrations, the current definition of Data Sovereignty is misleading (to say the least). The current definition reads:
"Data Sovereignty is the ability of a natural or legal person to exclusively and sovereignly decide concerning the usage of data as an economic asset."
Can you already provide any alternative (or updated) content that can/should replace the existing content?
I propose removing the determinant "economic" from the definition. However, a definition (or understanding) of asset should also be referred to or provided. In previous works I used this one: "Something or someone that provides worth when endowed with a purpose". Since this definition is arguable, I propose that we work on this definition together, by breaking down what the asset can be from a domain-agnostic perspective and illustrated with domain-specific examples.
Additional notes
The rationale to challenge the current definition is that, in Public Sector, the worth or benefit emerging from the purpose and use of the asset is not always economic, but social, cultural, political, personal, ecological, etc.
The concept of asset has never been well and sufficiently defined, IMO. One proof of this (my) statement is the (poor, tautologic and ambiguous) definition of what an Asset is in the ADMS vocabulary (https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms/#asset).
Which part of the repository is your change request related to? https://docs.internationaldataspaces.org/ids-ram-4/context-of-the-international-data-spaces/2_1_data-driven-business_ecosystems/2_2_data_sovereignty_as_a_key_capability
Please describe which content you would expect here and tell us how to solve this request in the "Business Area" of Public Sector, and more specifically in the Business Case of Public Administrations, the current definition of Data Sovereignty is misleading (to say the least). The current definition reads:
"Data Sovereignty is the ability of a natural or legal person to exclusively and sovereignly decide concerning the usage of data as an economic asset."
Can you already provide any alternative (or updated) content that can/should replace the existing content?
I propose removing the determinant "economic" from the definition. However, a definition (or understanding) of asset should also be referred to or provided. In previous works I used this one: "Something or someone that provides worth when endowed with a purpose". Since this definition is arguable, I propose that we work on this definition together, by breaking down what the asset can be from a domain-agnostic perspective and illustrated with domain-specific examples.
Additional notes The rationale to challenge the current definition is that, in Public Sector, the worth or benefit emerging from the purpose and use of the asset is not always economic, but social, cultural, political, personal, ecological, etc.
The concept of asset has never been well and sufficiently defined, IMO. One proof of this (my) statement is the (poor, tautologic and ambiguous) definition of what an Asset is in the ADMS vocabulary (https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms/#asset).