search

Letractively / publishing-statistical-data

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/publishing-statistical-data
0 stars 0 forks source link

Need code list values for CL_OBS_STATUS #8

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
The current sdmx-cog.ttl does not have the code list values for observation
status (COG annex 1, p 6). This would fill in the (currently missing) range
for the obsStatus property:

sdmx:obsStatus a rdf:Property ;
  rdfs:label "observation status"@en ;
  rdfs:comment "Information on the quality of a value or an unusual or
missing value."@en ;
  rdfs:domain scv:Item ;
  rdfs:range sdmx:ObsStatus .

Original issue reported on code.google.com by i.j.dick...@gmail.com on 24 Mar 2010 at 12:06

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
BTW, shouldn't the domain be sdmx:Observation (or sdmx:Attachable)?

Original comment by richard....@gmail.com on 30 Mar 2010 at 12:09

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
The domain is just quoted from the COG translation that Jeni did last year. 
Dave has
an action to update the COG to reflect our current views; mentions of Scovo will
disappear at that point

Original comment by i.j.dick...@gmail.com on 30 Mar 2010 at 12:46

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I've now published updated versions of the RDF-ized code lists (along with the 
COG
concepts, associated Attribute/Dimension/MeasureProperty instances and the 
Subject
Matter concepts).

I've put them at URIs for the form:

  http://purl.org/linked-data/sdmx/2009/{x}#{c}

where {x} is one of {concept, attribute, dimension, measure, code, subject} and 
{c}
is the localName for the concept or property being defined.

I included a date path element because all the COG documents from which they 
derive
are also dated 2009 which suggests that they might get updated at some point.

I've used hash instead of slash URIs so that they can be resolved using our 
current
publishing approach. I've created all the relevant PURLs, redirected them to the
GoogleCode entries and marked them as maintainable by any of the GoogleCode 
project
committers.

I've left out domain/range declarations for the properties for now since the
decisions on attachment level might affect that but could add in 
smdmx:Attachable if
people think that would be useful.

Comments on the RDFization or the URI structure welcome. If they need changing 
then I
suggest we open a new issue and so am closing this one.

Dave

Original comment by Dave.e.R...@gmail.com on 8 Apr 2010 at 4:19