Difference between revisions of "Data Quality"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Wiki-JoWalsh (talk | contribs) (work in progress) |
Wiki-JoWalsh (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
+ | * INSPIRE does not mandate quality standards but Joint Research Commission recognises that not to consider quality, is an oversight. | ||
+ | * The ISO standards regarding quality of geographic information are oriented towards quality assurance in the data production process | ||
+ | * This means a lack of focus on the value of data quality information from the end-user's perspective - what problems are we helping to solve by publishing data quality information? | ||
+ | |||
+ | * For example, OS Research has done extensive work on a "vernacular gazetteer" of shapes for social names, but data quality concerns prohibit its release, even for research. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Geodata world has its domain specific problems, can benefit from looking at lighter weight / | ||
+ | differently conceived quality approaches from other domains. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * The aim should be to encourage and support the publication of more data of variable, knowably unknown quality. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Quality currently looks like a niche issue. New developments in data sharing over the internet will raise priority for machine-reusable descriptions of data quality (distributed databases; multiple copies of the same resource unsynchronised, or variably edited; more collaborative mapping projects along lines of OSM and OpenAddresses; lossy or transient datastores; linked data pollution) | ||
== Fit for 15/10? == | == Fit for 15/10? == |
Revision as of 04:47, 27 October 2010
For now this page is to discuss a proposal for a short project (4-7 months) looking at data quality approaches to collaborative online sources of information. This is something that could be an interesting fit for the geospatial strand of JISC funding call 15/10 on infrastructures for education and research.
Overview
- INSPIRE does not mandate quality standards but Joint Research Commission recognises that not to consider quality, is an oversight.
- The ISO standards regarding quality of geographic information are oriented towards quality assurance in the data production process
- This means a lack of focus on the value of data quality information from the end-user's perspective - what problems are we helping to solve by publishing data quality information?
- For example, OS Research has done extensive work on a "vernacular gazetteer" of shapes for social names, but data quality concerns prohibit its release, even for research.
- Geodata world has its domain specific problems, can benefit from looking at lighter weight /
differently conceived quality approaches from other domains.
- The aim should be to encourage and support the publication of more data of variable, knowably unknown quality.
- Quality currently looks like a niche issue. New developments in data sharing over the internet will raise priority for machine-reusable descriptions of data quality (distributed databases; multiple copies of the same resource unsynchronised, or variably edited; more collaborative mapping projects along lines of OSM and OpenAddresses; lossy or transient datastores; linked data pollution)
Fit for 15/10?
Themes
- Starting with Nothing
- Attestation
- Edit-time quality reporting
- ...