dct:publisher: use of a controlled vocabulary

[sabinem]

Property: dct:publisher Class: dcat:Catalog and dcat:Dataset Conformance Problem: DCAT-AP 2.0.0 recommends a vocabulary for the publisher Details: "The Corporate bodies NAL must be used for European institutions and a small set of international organisations. In case of other types of organisations, national, regional or local vocabularies should be used" Proposal: A vocabulary has been proposed: https://www.dcat-ap.ch/vocabulary/publishers/20210623.html: the entries for it have been extracted via a tool from the names entered in dct:publisher on https://ckan.opendata.swiss

[metaodi]

The currently proposed vocabulary at https://www.dcat-ap.ch/vocabulary/publishers/20210623.html has very bad quality. I propose to have a hierarchy (if this is possible) and make sure they follow a clear naming scheme (e.g. use a comma to separate levels, start at the top level "Stadt Zürich, Präsidialdepratement, Statistik Stadt Zürich").

How does the process to add a new publisher look like? In theory all 64 departments of the City of Zurich could be publishers. Or we could simply provide "Stadt Zürich" when exporting to opendata.swiss. Which is prefered? I think some guidelines are necessary for this attribute.

[andreasamsler]

While I support the idea, I would to support the point, that this vocabulary needs much improvement. I am willing to invest time in improving it by applying existing/future vocabularies in this field, cf. by the Federal Chancellery, Staatskanzlei ZH etc.

[Juan-Juan-1]

@andreasamsler thank you, agree! We're indeed checking the possibility to make use of available vocabularies such as Termdat or from the "Staatskalender". I dare to hope that we as a (open) data people won't have to define such a vocabulary on our own :)

[p1d1d1]

Dear all I suggest here we try to identify synergies with LINDAS. All organizations publishing on opendata.swiss are available as Linked Data here: https://register.ld.admin.ch/opendataswiss/org.

Departments are available here: https://ld.admin.ch/department. Federal Offices are available here: https://ld.admin.ch/office. Both departments and offices have a sameAs link to the Staatskalender, which is availabe here: https://register.ld.admin.ch/staatskalender/organization/10000000

[Juan-Juan-1]

Hi @p1d1d1, thank you for the nice input. We were already discussing with the BAR about it, but it's true there could be a quite real synergy here... I'm gonna clarify it with the BAR and give updates here.

[GeorgisGeorgis]

Hi @p1d1d1 and @Juan-Juan-1, the Federal Chancellery is indeed planing to make sure that the Departements and the Federal Officies as made available on LINDAS are stable and curated. We use these data-sets for some of our applications as well. But we are not quite there yet. Data is not "historicised" yet and the responsibility for curating the data has not yet been assigned. But I would nevertheless make use them, that was exactly the rationale for creating the set in the first place! It will also be an incentive for use to make sure that the data will indeed be kept up to date and complete.

[Juan-Juan-1]

Dear @GeorgisGeorgis , thank you very much for your input. We'll definitely look into that during our next eCH-Meeting, looks very promising!

[andreasamsler]

Dear @GeorgisGeorgis, very happy to read you here. I have a question regarding the "Staatskalender": Our Canton of Zurich is completing a project study atm on the topic of "eDirectory" by mid-December. I have advised the ZH project team to seek a stronger exchange with the Federal Chancellery in order to outline an - not necessarily identical, but definitely - interoperable solution. I have also shared contact info between the ZH project team and the LD service provider of the Federal Chancellery. Simply because it is important that people know about each other's experiences and that they are open to learning from each other. In short:

• Can the Canton of Zurich re-use the ontology of the LD state calendar?
• Who needs to know about it now and/or decide something (what?) so that this could become a collaboration/cooperation?
• Are their obstacles - e.g. procurement and/or others?

Many thanks in advance: andreas.amsler@statistik.ji.zh.ch

[Juan-Juan-1]

Vorschlag: Usage note + Beispiel. «ein kontrolliertes Vokabular wird später geprüft / empfohlen, ist aber nicht ein Muss/es könnten z.B. diese Vokabulare nutzen»

[fabian-santi]

While using a controlled vocabulary for publishers would be nice, there needs to be a clear and if possible simple process to add entries. Staatskalender or Termdat might be insufficient since there can also be private companies using the catalog.

[metaodi]

I think it's a good idea to pick publishers from a controlled vocabulary, but as @fabian-santi pointed out: we don't know all users of this standard, so it should still be possible to provide use a foaf:Organization and be standard-compliant.

DCAT Germany has en extra attribute for this purpose: they added dcatde:contributorID and have a controller vocabulary for it: https://www.dcat-ap.de/def/dcatde/2.0/spec/#kv-contributors

I propose to adapt this attribute in DCAT CH.