Suggestions on how to capture exceptions.
In Belgium descriptions (free text) and the list of applicable sectors (controlled vocabulary) for a specific service are sometimes specified as "applies to everyone, except for X, Y, Z"
E.g. service dealing with the registration of private actors in the diamant sector _except_ for companies only dealing with insurance of diamant trade.
For the free text, should we come up with a separate property ?
Or some (ugly) hack like storing it as a rdf:HTML data type and add some HTML-class (<div class="except...) ?
Similar question for "sector", should there perhaps be a property "exceptSector" ?
Component
CodeCategory
support
Login or
create an account to comment.
Comments
Hi Bart,
Rather not the ugly hack if possible. From a catalogue perspective, one can indeed encounter (formally based) exceptions in agents/stakeholders of certain services.
In the (revised) CPSV-AP though, I would state this information as a rule within scope of a framework. In a catalogue you typically want a generic description of a service, the link to the competent authority & the output you can expect from the service. What you describe, seems to me as a rule excluding a rather generic scope of stakeholders (organisations, but also possibly people, groups of people/organisation, etc...).
Can you find yourself in this logic?
If what Thomas says works, that's the simplest solution I'd say.
If not, the free text description can be anything, so I don't think we need to worry about that. For the sector, the recommended controlled vocab is NACE codes which, AFAICT don't have a code for 'all sectors' so we'd have to create such a code or specify that the default was all sectors, and then either have a property as you suggest of 'exceptSector' that would take a list of values, or a 'notApplicableToSector' property if we want to have that property multiple times with single NACE codes as values for each instance.
This is all possible, of course, and if needed can be added, but it's a layer of complexity that it would be good to avoid if possible.
Thanks, I'll give Rule a try
(having noticed that the sectors we're currently using are not mapped to NACE anyway _and_ we also have a Belgian version of NACE adding additional levels to NACE, we have to do some homework on our side first)
Discussion above seems conclusive.