Meeting Notes 2022 June 23

[InKyungChoi]

Participants: Francine Kalonji, Flavio Rizzolo, Andrea Petres, Florian Vucko, Jenny Linnerud, Zoltan Vereczkei, Dan Gillman, Giorgia Simeoni, Ayman Hathoot, Juan Munoz, MEJIA GONZALEZ RAUL, Cecilia Casagrande, Wai Kit (Jackie) Si Tou, Christopher Jones and InKyung Choi

Issue #6 Missing GSIM class – quality indicators

On the proposal simplifying the referential metadata

• Before, we did not have a class for "referential metadata" itself, so it is good to have a separate class on that
• Would we need a class for metadata structure (e.g., template used for reporting quality)? Perhaps at conceptual level, it might be enough to have Referential Metadata Attribute and hierarchy)

Link between GSIM classes and Referential Metadata Attribute / Subject

• Subject is telling what GSIM class that the metadata is about, attributes tell different aspects we want to report on the subject.
• Referential Metadata Attribute can refer to many things from data sets, questionnaire, quality indicator, text description, confidentiality policy, etc. But currently, there is only Represented Variable connected to Referential Metadata Attribute
• It is not clear how Represented Variable can be used for different types of Referential Metadata Attribute such as Questionnaire (perhaps having a Code List for different versions of the Questionnaire, but this seems stretched). Represented Variable is used to talk about Referential Metadata Attribute but GSIM classes are not used directly to represent the attributes. Also, it cannot be used for metadata that exist as PDF forms. GSIM diagram shows Represented Variable is optional, but definition of Referential Metadata Attribute suggests Represented Variable is mandatory.
• Referential Metadata Subject can refer to statistical programmes, outputs, etc. The way it is modelled currently is quite indirect (e.g., pick name of products from Value Domain)
• In the proposed diagram, there is no direct link between Referential Metadata and GSIM classes that can be Referential Metadata Subject, this link can be done through Administrative Details (to which any document can be added) of Identifiable Artifact. Should this be done directly through GSIM classes? Should we create a new GSIM class to represent all things that can be used as attributes (but it is hard to be exhaustive)
• We need to be careful comparing what SDMX can do with what GSIM can do, they are built for the different purposes and logic. GSIM referential metadata part was built based on SDMX, it might be reason why this part of GSIM does not fit so well with other parts of GSIM.
• Example like this can provide a concreate way to check if what we are doing makes sense. In this example, LHS is Referential Metadata Subject, QRS is referential metadata structure, list of contact, statistical presentation, these are Referential Metadata Attributes
• If we simplify referential metadata part (without strong structure modelling), would this be still part of GSIM Structure Group?