Please find below the minutes of the 29th of September

Participants: Ana Aido, Cécile Guasch, Hilde Kjølset, Giorgia Lodi, Thor Møller, Natalie Muric, Helder Santos, Juan Carlos Segura, Gaimpaolo Sellitto, Jalini Srisgantharajah, and Enric Staromiejski.

Topic of discussion: Review of the minutes from the 22nd of September

  • The reification is not a taxonomy. To change the sentence. The reification is a class that connects the roles taxonomy.

  • The final proposal of the elements repeated in a taxonomy was to put them out from the taxonomy.

  • The sentence nonetheless, they will have different tags… to be removed is not true anymore.

  • The sentence The WG asked why not do add the attributes… to be rephrase.

  • To add examples to the minutes.

Topic of discussion: Organisation and Organisation group error get from the conventions script

  • OP explained that through the convention script was got the following error concerning the classes Organisation and OrganisationGroup: The classes epo:Organisation and epo:OrganisationGroup inherit one another. Sub-class relation must be established in one direction only, forming a hierarchy.

  • According to the WG there is not an error on the model and therefore it should be checked with Eugeniu to see if there is bug in the script.

Topic of discussion: FinancialOfferValue

  • The WG discussed which is the best modelling approach if to have the FinancialOfferValue as an object property or as a class.

  • The WG asked if this class is needed for the eOrdering. The WG justified that it is not needed if in eOrdering we have the Value, then the FinancialOfferValue can be got from it.

  • The WG decision was to remove the class the FinancialOfferValue and to convert it into an object property as in v2.0.1 in the model

Topic of discussion: Roles and Subroles

The WG continued with the discussion of roles and subroles.

The WG started the discussion mentioning that the solution proposed in the last meeting is very generic. For example, the WG was not completely convinced with the name "event" for the reification. The WG discussed alternatives of it, but previously we need to understand where we need data of organisations, activities, etc.

The WG also indicates that the name "Event" is very generic object and the implications is that it can be used for anything in any situation. In terms of querying, the WG indicates that the results on a query in a reification retrieves a lot of entities in the result since it is very generic. For the purpose to see different query results, the WG saw the need to define user stories to define competency questions.

After different points of discussions on how to model the roles and subroles, the WG agreed on the approach of the reification, codes and taxonomies, but also was identified the need of simplify the reification and use them only in a given a context with only those classes that need to be reified for that context. The WG agreed on the fact that the reification should be specialised.

The WG, concerning the "ProcuremenEvent" class reification, decided as an action point to see which are the "events" that the ontology currently has.

Action Point:

  • To review the minutes of the 22nd of September