Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1224Re: Relationship from concept to non G2 entities

Expand Messages
  • Jo
    Sep 12, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Misha

      re "In case someone thinks that the continuity
      of the country's name indicates a continuity of identity, they are mistaken. " - I'm intrigued.

      Though the territorial extent of the old Sudan has changed, most other aspects of it have not, for example afaik it is still the same geopolitical actor, continues to have representation abroad in the same form etc. I think the numeric code has changed because the territorial limits have changed and that the ISO alpha code has remained the same because the (continuing) government of Sudan did not request a change to its code.

      A similar thing happened for Germany, I believe, upon the integration of the former DDR. That doesn't mean, afaik, that DE represents a different country (qua geopolitical actor) before and after the change of numeric code, though likewise its territorial extend did change.

      Contrariwise, a while ago, Zaire became the Democratic Republic of the Congo and changed its code from ZR to CD but kept its numeric code of 180.

      A good illustration of the need to understand the policies behind code maintenance, and in this case possibly a good illustration of the need for clarity in distinguishing a geopolitical actor and its associated territory. You can take a skiing holiday in France (location) and make a treaty with France (geopolitical actor) but you can't make a treaty with a location nor take a skiing holiday in a geopolitical actor.

      For some applications it may be useful to distinguish SDN pre-9th July 2011 from SDN post-9th July - perhaps one should use a different alias from within NewsML?

      Likewise, by analogy, for Philippe's question. Ideally he'd have a chronology of the introduction of and deprecation of codes, of course.

      Best
      Jo

      --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, misha.wolf@... wrote:
      >
      > Hi Philippe,
      >
      > This is a difficult issue. Thanks for raising it. We shall have to tweak the wording.
      >
      > Regarding ISO, I'm afraid that the same issue applies. As from 2011-08-09, the ISO 3166-1 codes SD and SDN identify a different country from the country they identified prior to that date [1]. In case someone thinks that the continuity of the country's name indicates a continuity of identity, they are mistaken. The numeric code assigned by the UN (which is reflected in the ISO 3166-1 numeric code) changed on 2011-07-09 [2].
      >
      > [1] http://www.iso.org/iso/nl_vi-10_south_sudan.pdf
      > [2] http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49alpha.htm
      >
      > Misha
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
      > Sent: 12 September 2011 11:34
      > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: Re: [newsml-g2] Relationship from concept to non G2 entities
      >
      > Thanks Misha and Michael.
      >
      > So, say I create a "locsysA" scheme as in Michael example, I would then instruct receivers that if they get a concept URI that starts with "http://cvx.anewsprovider.com/locationsystemA/" then the identifier in system A can be computed by removing this prefix from the URI and percent decoding what remains. Right?
      >
      > Still, I have a concern with this approach regarding G2 requirements and I would welcome guidance on this:
      >
      > G2 makes several requirements governing schemes and concepts URI. In particular, in 12.5.4.1 of the implementation guide (revision 3):
      > - Concepts MUST NOT be deleted from a Scheme [...]
      > - For the same reason, Concept IDs MUST NOT be re-cycled, i.e. the same identifier used for a different concept.
      >
      > The issue is that my non-G2 systems A and B do not work like that: sometimes they delete stuff and they even recycle identifiers. And while they are internal systems in my company, they are not under my control and I can't change their identifier management policies, even if I was to ask politely.
      >
      > This means that the concept URI http://cvx.anewsprovider.com/locationsystemA/654321 won't necessarily identify the same concept (i.e., the same location) forever, which seems to break the G2 requirements.
      >
      > This is probably an issue we don't have with ISO codes.
      >
      > So how would you approach the situation. Would you go ahead and consider its ok in such instances to loosen those G2 rules?
      >
      > Philippe
      >
      > Le 9 sept. 2011 à 17:01, Michael Steidl (IPTC) a écrit :
      >
      > > Adding to what Misha said: look at the http://cvx.iptc.org/ page: it provides scheme URIs for schemes which are a) not G2 compliant schemes by their authority and b) outside the governance of the IPTC. Despite of this we assign a scheme URI which points to a page which explains how to resolve the code.
      > >
      > > Let's go through Philippe's example
      > >
      > > Add to a catalog.
      > > <scheme alias="locsysA" uri="http://cvx.anewsprovider.com/locationsystemA/" />
      > > <scheme alias="locsysB" uri="http://cvx.anewsprovider.com/locationsystemB/" />
      > >
      > > Create web pages for these URIs explaining what location repository this is and that the code used for this scheme is the unique ID of a location in this system.
      > >
      > > Add sameAs to your concept:
      > > <sameAs qcode="locsysA:654321" />
      > > <sameAs qcode="locsysB:569843" />
      > >
      > > I guess that's it.
      > >
      > > Michael
      > >
      > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > > Behalf Of misha.wolf@...
      > > > Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 12:46 PM
      > > > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
      > > > Subject: RE: [newsml-g2] Relationship from concept to non G2 entities
      > > >
      > > > Hi Philippe,
      > > >
      > > > It doesn't matter whether systems A and B are G2-compliant. We use
      > > > qcodes for everything, eg ISO country codes, ISO currency codes, etc.
      > > > The relevant ISO standards say nothing about G2 but this doesn't make
      > > > any difference.
      > > >
      > > > In "scheme:code", the "scheme" simply identifies the place that the
      > > > "code" is taken from.
      > > >
      > > > Regards,
      > > > Misha
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > > Behalf Of Philippe Mougin
      > > > Sent: 09 September 2011 09:57
      > > > To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
      > > > Subject: [newsml-g2] Relationship from concept to non G2 entities
      > > >
      > > > Hi,
      > > >
      > > > I have a G2-based system where I use a <concept> element to represent a
      > > > particular location (the city of Paris). It happens that I also have
      > > > two
      > > > other systems (A and B), non G2 based, where I manage locations. These
      > > > systems have their own identifiers for the city of Paris. In system A,
      > > > the identifier is "654321" and in system B one the identifier is
      > > > "569843".
      > > >
      > > > In my G2 <concept> I want to provide those identifiers as part of the
      > > > concept description.
      > > >
      > > > At first glance, it seems that <sameAs> correctly express the
      > > > relationship I want to represent. I my <concept> I would have:
      > > >
      > > > <sameAs type="cpnat:geoArea" literal="654321">
      > > > <sameAs type="cpnat:geoArea" literal="569843">
      > > >
      > > > But of course this doesn't work because for any meaningful processing I
      > > > would also need to know that the first one relates to system A and the
      > > > second one relates to system B.
      > > >
      > > > I can't use qcode instead of literal as system A and system B aren't
      > > > G2-based and consequently don't expose their identifiers through G2
      > > > QCodes. I could create such schemes myself but since my goal is to
      > > > communicate the identifiers of Paris in A and B (and not in newly
      > > > created ad hoc schemes) that would be self defeating.
      > > >
      > > > So how would you approach the problem ?
      > > >
      > > > Note : as a fallback I'm thinking about using <remoteInfo> elements.
      > > > For
      > > > example :
      > > >
      > > > <remoteInfo rel="rels:equivalent-in-systemA" residref="654321">
      > > > <remoteInfo rel="rels:equivalent-in-systemB" residref="569843">
      > > >
      > > > Thanks,
      > > >
      > > > Philippe
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > ------------------------------------
      > > >
      > > > Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the
      > > > Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at
      > > > http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be submitted
      > > > under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > This email was sent to you by Thomson Reuters, the global news and
      > > > information company. Any views expressed in this message are those of
      > > > the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them
      > > > to be the views of Thomson Reuters.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > ------------------------------------
      > > >
      > > > Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the
      > > > Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at
      > > > http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be submitted
      > > > under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be submitted under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > This email was sent to you by Thomson Reuters, the global news and information company. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Thomson Reuters.
      >
    • Show all 12 messages in this topic