[Seavox] Devices: a new vocabulary for SeaVoX

Thu Sep 30 17:11:21 BST 2010

Hi Nan,

Unfortunately, there is a fixed underlying data model, comprising:

Key
Long name
Short name
Definition

This cannot be adjusted for individual lists, so I can't add any additional columns or extra elements in the document without major re-engineering of the Vocabulary Server back office.  

I have bodged my way around this in some lists (such as the C174 SeaDataNet ship list) by making the 'definition' an XML snippet like:

<skos:definition><notes>blah blah</notes><document>URL1</document><data_sheet>URL2</data_sheet></skos:definition>

This greatly upsets my developers because it breaks their XSDs, but Maris have built a nice client that parses it and displays it.  See for example:

http://seadatanet.maris2.nl/v_bodc_vocab/browse.asp?order=entrykey&formname=search&screen=0&l=C174&v0_0=&v1_0=entrykey%2Centryterm%2Centrytermabbr%2Centrytermdef%2Centrytermlastmod&v2_0=0&v0_1=&v1_1=entrykey&v2_1=3&v0_2=&v1_2=entryterm&v2_2=3&v0_3=&v1_3=entrytermabbr&v2_3=3&v0_4=&v1_4=entrytermlastmod&v2_4=9&v0_5=&v1_5=entrytermlastmod&v2_5=10&v1_6=&v2_6=&v1_7=&v2_7=&x=42&y=11

which parses http://vocab.ndg.nerc.ac.uk/list/C174/current. It's heavily embedded into our system so adding another list to be re-engineered when we find a better solution isn't an issue.

If you think this is a good way forward, what elements would you like to see the definition subdivided into?  Anybody else any feelings on this approach?

Note that the document URL points to a java application that dynamically builds HTML documents from content in Oracle.  The content is developed by BODC data scientists and we have a policy (sometimes flouted but reinstated when I spot it!) that PDFs should only served from our PDF vault due to risk of external links breaking.  This does mean that we may not be able to include documents because of copyright issues, but manufacturer's generally seem happy with our serving them.

Cheers, Roy.

-----Original Message-----
From: seavox-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk [mailto:seavox-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Nan Galbraith
Sent: 30 September 2010 16:35
To: seavox at biwebs1-2.nerc-liv.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [Seavox] Devices: a new vocabulary for SeaVoX

  What I'd find especially helpful would be if the links to the instrument
specs were presented in a slightly different way. Using the ever-useful
example of the SBE 37, the URL for the spec sheet is provided, but
is buried in the definition:

>  <skos:definition>The SBE 37 MicroCAT is a high accuracy conductivity
>  and temperature recorder with an optional pressure sensor designed
>  for depolyment on moorings. The IM model has an inductive modem for
>  real-time data transmission plus internal flash memory data storage.
>  Further information may be found on the BODC document server at URL
>  http://www.bodc.ac.uk/data/documents/nodb/113079/.</skos:definition>

The document containing the specs, 113079, although it's html, is
still useful for humans (of course, it'd be great if it were xml, but 
I'm being
realistic, I hope). It would be really helpful if, for instruments with 
available
spec sheets, this link were a separate field, so it could be extracted more
easily. I don't know how many of the instruments in this list have spec
sheets available in html, or what other formats are being used, but having
a standard field that points to them would make this more useful, I
think.

On the other hand, unless all the spec docs are held at BODC, that
poses a problem with maintenance - but that's the case whether these
are clearly exposed by having their own fields, or not.

Thanks -
Nan

On 9/29/10 12:03 PM, Lowry, Roy K wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> Broad categories are held in L05 and mapped to L221 by narrowMatch 
> relationships. The only 'broadening' within the list is where names 
> are known to different levels of detail.
>
> Putting a semantic model behind the naming is a good idea: it's what 
> I've done with parameters. But as you say, it's work and unless a 
> volunteer steps forward, it's unlikely to happen to existing content 
> this year. However, in the mean time I'll make sure that if content 
> containing this level of structure is supplied then it will be 
> preserved. Getting the MBARI list with structured names would be good 
> for both content extension and providing an example of the structuring.
>
> My purpose for the list is to provide a vocabulary for tagging data 
> objects with their 'data production tool or tools'. Our system uses 
> this vocabulary in a structure with ordered workflow so a series can 
> be tagged 'water bottle then autoanalyser'. However, I'm guessing 
> others may have additional applications.
>
> Cheers, Roy.
>
> *From:* John Graybeal [mailto:jbgraybeal at mindspring.com]
> *Sent:* 29 September 2010 16:36
> *To:* Lowry, Roy K
> *Cc:* seavox at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [Seavox] Devices: a new vocabulary for SeaVoX
>
> Yes, with some caveats:
>
> It wasn't clear from the email, but a casual look at the list suggests 
> it *only* contains instrument names, not any broader instrument 
> categories. I think that's important to keep those two lists separate, 
> to avoid conflating them.
>
> I think each name corresponds to these things: (a) manufacturer; (b) 
> model; (c) casual name that blends (a) and (b) with a function. The 
> list becomes more useful if (a), (b), and the function all come from 
> controlled vocabularies, and are separately described within each 
> term. I know that's work, I'm just predicting it's work that will be 
> done sooner or later, and normalizing the formation of the list now 
> will save you (or many others) time later.
>
> MBARI has a list of such instruments broken down in this way, it could 
> probably be provided as well, which gets back to Nan's point about the 
> purpose of the list and the methods for contributing to it.
>
> John
>
> .
>
> On Sep 29, 2010, at 00:57, Lowry, Roy K wrote:
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> SeaVoX traffic resembles buses. Nothing for ages then two messages 
> come together!
>
> There has been a project in BODC over the past couple of years to tag 
> data with more detailed device metadata, using actual instrument names 
> rather than instrument categories to populate 'data production tool' 
> fields in metadata. Thus 'Aanderaa RCM4/5' is now used instead of 
> 'Savonious rotor current meter'. When I looked at the metadatabase we 
> were building to support this it became apparent that it fitted very 
> comfortably into the vocabulary data model and that the concepts in it 
> could be mapped to the 'SeaDataNet device categories' (the L05x group 
> of lists) to form quite a handy thesaurus, which I have exposed 
> through the NERC Vocabulary Server as 
> http://vocab.ndg.nerc.ac.uk/list/L221
>
> In parallel, the IODE GE-BiCh expert group - largely the work of Mary 
> Kennedy - has compiled a comprehensive list of nets and plankton 
> samplers that would fit neatly together with the BODC list. Mary and 
> Hernan Garcia of USNODC have also recently been working on compiling a 
> catalogue of water samplers, which could be included.
>
> So, my proposal is that the L221 vocabulary be transferred from BODC 
> to SeaVoX governance, merged with the GE-BiCh contributions and 
> further developed as a joint effort by SeaVoX. Is this an acceptable 
> proposition?
>
> Cheers, Roy.
>
>

-- 
*******************************************************
* Nan Galbraith                        (508) 289-2444 *
* Upper Ocean Processes Group            Mail Stop 29 *
* Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution                *
* Woods Hole, MA 02543                                *
*******************************************************

_______________________________________________
Seavox mailing list
Seavox at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk
http://mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/seavox

-- 
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.