National Data Standardization: A Place

for Topic Maps?

Lars Johnsen

”There is something rotten in the state of Denmark”

- Shakespeare (1601)

2009: Challenges => modernization of the public sector => digitalization =>

interoperability

2001: It standardization efforts taking off 2006: B103 – Parliament voting for open

standards in Danish e-goverment 2008: Seven sets of open standards made

compulsory including web standards, document standards and data standards

Where is Topic Maps …?

To be or not to be – standardizing *

* … that’s one of the questions

Data standardization in Denmark◦ Background and status◦ New strategy being implemented by ITST (the

national agency for It and Telecom)◦ Technological infrastructure

Paradigm shift from syntax to semantics or even subject-centric thinking …

Why not TM?

Agenda

Data standards - OIOXML

OIOXML schemas

Domain schemasCore components

Problems with OIOXML schemas

Content

Little documentation◦ What legislation?◦ What contexts?◦ What projects, web

services, etc. Findability and

usability Uploading Organizing Viewing

Concepts

No real semantics: <MaritalStatusCode>

◦ married◦ divorced◦ widow◦ registered partnership◦ abolition of partnership◦ longest living partner◦ deceased◦ unmarried

</MaritalStatusCode>

What do you read, my lord? Words, words, words

A new strategy in the pipeline

Semantic definitions

Concept systemsTaxonomies

Data definitions

Message definitions

WDSL files

OIOXML schemas

Concept systems: building on existing methodologies

FORM – a reference model of public services in Denmark

Social services

Benefits

Individual benefits

Allocation of housing benefit

Action

Object

From concept systems to taxonomies and thesauri

In the future: semantic definitions as pivots

<SemanticDefinition definitionIdentifier = ”…” systemIdentifier = ”…” versionIdentifier = ”…”>

<Localization languageCode =”DA”><Term roleCode = ”preferred”>…</Term><Term roleCode = ”admitted”>…</term>…<Description roleCode = ”definition”>…</Description>

</Localization>…

</SemanticDefinition>

Semantic definition

client

From semantics to syntaxSemantic

definition

client status

ClientClient_status: custody, …

Data definition

<ClientStatusCode><enumeration value =”custody” />

…</ClientStatusCode>

OIOXML“Though this be madness, yet there is method in it”

has

Semantic definition custod

y

is a

Conceptual layer◦ Concept systems and taxonomies = TAO

topics/subjects, properties, associations, roles◦ Semantic definition = PSI

names, descriptions, explanations, etc. of subjects (in one or more languages)

Content or resource layer◦ OIOXML schemas, data definitions, wsdl files =

occurrences/addressable subjects◦ Embedded OIO schemas = part-whole associations between

addressable subjects, etc.

TM model, really

So, why not simply adopt TM as a unifying model or standard for representing and organizing ”data standards data” in Denmark …?

This question becomes even more relevant …

Instead an entirely new OIOXML language is being developed …

Web 2.0 platform (Digitaliser.dk)◦ Information architecture centered on groups◦ Functionality for news, debates, user networks,

etc.◦ Tagging as primary organization vehicle

REST API◦ Resources, representations and structured URL’s

Finding, publishing and sharing ..

Prediction: a dire need for an organizational/navigational overlay integrating

distributed conceptual information, resources and metadata on Digitaliser.dk

Why not adopt TM as a unifying technology for

organizing and integrating data standards content on

Digitaliser.dk (and elsewhere)?

Topic Maps as a technology working ”covertly” behind the scenes or topic maps as accessible information products in their own right?

OIO topic maps – truly open information sets about the

”state of Denmark”

Topic maps as resources on Digitaliser.dk?

Public institutions and authorities

The vision of OIO Topic Maps …

Public services (e.g. FORM)

Core conceptsLaws and guidelines

Public web services

Integration

Workflows

<topicMap version="2.0" xmlns="http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/"><topic id="enke"><subjectIdentifier href="http://digitaliser.dk/resource/123" /><subjectIdentifier href="http://api.digitaliser.dk/rest/resources/123/artefacts/enke.xml/content" /><instanceOf><topicRef href="#OIOconcept" /></instanceOf><name><scope><topicRef href="#DA" /></scope><value>enke</value></name><occurrence><type><topicRef href="#OIOXML" /></type><resourceData datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#anyType"> <MaritalStatusCode>widow</MaritalStatusCode></resourceData></occurrence> </topic>...</topicMap>

XTM 2.0 comes in handy …!

General lack of knowledge ”Topic Maps is a metadata standard like

Dublin Core” ”Concepts like subject, topic, identity and

merging are simply too hard to explain” ”We are not having that RDF and OWL stuff,

therefore we cannot adopt TM either” The TM vocabulary does not translate very

easily into Danish

Why is TM not a national standard?

And of course we do not have a Lars Marius or Steve P …

Emne - subjekt (topic/subject) Identifikator - indikator (subject identifier vs

indicator) Adresse (locator) Belæg – hændelse - forekomst (occurrence) Sammenslutning – sammenlægning - fusion

(merging)

Translating TM into Danish

Play the standard card (”TM is an international ISO standard, you know”)?

Create solutions! (chicken and egg problem)

RDF: friend or foe? The ”versatility problem”: promoting TM as

Semantic Web technology, metadata format, or what?

So, what should we do?

Perhaps Digitaliser.dk will solve the problem for us …

”The rest is silence!”