(Feedback from Norway) 

  1. 1 or more Statistical Program results in 0 or more Product. We hope not! Could we rather say 1 or more Statistical Program has 0 or more Product. When the Statistical Program starts it doesn’t have any Products yet, but if you have gone to the trouble of starting a Statistical Program, then we hope it results in at least one Product.
  2. We cannot see that Data Harvest is an improvement on Web Scraper Channel. If we do keep it, then could we at least change it to Data Harvester or Data Harvest Channel. Harvest sounds like the result of harvesting with a harvester. Nor do I like the Definition “A concrete and usable tool to pass information between two sources, usually by a machine to machine mechanism.” Hopefully, not much information goes from us although it may be in the Provision Agreement. Suggest “A concrete and usable tool to pass information from one source to another, usually by a machine to machine mechanism.” I note that API is mentioned as a type of Data Harvest(er). Good to see that API is mentioned. We are increasingly required to collect information from Administrative Registers via the owners APIs. A good example of an Environmental Change that is costing us a lot of time and resources. Google gives 12 million hits for ‘data harvesting’ and 2 million for ‘web scraping’. Maybe we should have web harvester!  Combined with Issue #2-4
  3. In our office we make Statistical Registers from Administrative Registers so for us it is more internal than an ‘Exchange channel used for incoming information’. It is more like a subtype of Information/Data Resource internally. Looking at your definition and explanatory text it is clear that you also regard this as internal to a statistical organisation. We strongly suspect this information object is not and should not be a subtype of Exchange Channel. We recommend that this is removed as a subtype of Exchange Channel. It is very important, but it should be in the Structures Group.Combined with Issue #2-4
  • No labels

2 Comments

  1. InKyung Choi

    For clarification, below is from exchange with Jenny (above: current; below: proposal)

    While a program is being planned it has 0 …* so the cardinality when you change “results in “ to “has” should be 0…*.

  2. InKyung Choi

    GSIM Virtual Sprint (23 Jan.)

    Decision: product can still be there w/o statistical program, so change relation from composition (black diamond) to aggregation (white diamond).