-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
describe all IdentifierSystems
relevant for Trade and Logistics
#944
Comments
Eg look at traceability-vocab/docs/openapi/components/schemas/common/Place.yml Lines 68 to 74 in 8b5efda
It has a lot of details jumbled into one string. More importantly, these details are in JSON schema but not in Linked Data! If you want to switch to structured identifiers: <https://w3id.org/traceability/identifier/US/CBP/Port> a tr:IdentifierSystem;
s:identifier "US/CBP/Port";
s:name "US CBP Port Code";
s:description "United States Customs and Border Protection: Port Code";
skos:definition "CBP Automated Manifest Interface Requirements, Appendix E - Schedule D – U.S. CBP Port Codes. 4 character port code";
s:creator <https://www.cbp.gov>;
rdfs:isDefinedBy <https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020-Jan/ACE%20Appendix%20E%20Schedule%20D%20January%202020%20(1).pdf>;
rdfs:seeAlso <https://www.cbp.gov/about/contact/ports>;
s:classification <https://w3id.org/traceability/identifier/customs>;
s:country <https://w3id.org/traceability/country/US>. If you want to continue using distinct properties for each identifier: tr:usPortCode a rdf:Property, owl:DataProperty;
rdfs:subPropertyOf s:identifier;
rdfs:label "US CBP Port Code";
rdfs:comment "United States Customs and Border Protection: Port Code";
skos:definition "CBP Automated Manifest Interface Requirements, Appendix E - Schedule D – U.S. CBP Port Codes. 4 character port code";
s:creator <https://www.cbp.gov>;
rdfs:isDefinedBy <https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020-Jan/ACE%20Appendix%20E%20Schedule%20D%20January%202020%20(1).pdf)>;
rdfs:seeAlso <https://www.cbp.gov/about/contact/ports>;
s:classification <https://w3id.org/traceability/identifier/customs>;
s:country https://w3id.org/traceability/country/US>. |
Agree with your comments. |
Agreed with your comments in general, this looks like a very useful change. |
Closing as #571 has the action item that will resolve this issue, the solution we'll use is Structured Value With Prefix as outlined in |
(Split from #571)
@mkhraisha @nissimsan @rhofvendahl @brownoxford @OR13
I will outline below several ways of capturing identifiers, going from bad to good.
Look at the last way:
I think the Traceability project will add a lot of value if it collects a global register of identifier systems used in trade and logistics
Ambiguous String
This is terrible since it gives no clue about the nature of the identifier:
String With Prefix
This is better but it requires a human to google for the different prefixes, and hope to find the correct ones:
Structured Value With Prefix
This clearly separates the identifier kind from the identifier value, but still doesn't describe the kind unambiguously.
Structured Value With Structured Kind
This describes the identifier kind unambiguously and provides linked data about it. It is definitely the best approach.
ebg:IdentifierSystem
), I use the same class name.s:identifier
for the abbreviation ands:name
for the full name of the identifier system.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: