Working Group meeting (Maintenance & evolution of existing modules)

Date: 18/01/2024
Participants: Paloma Arillo, Najeh Hajlaoui, Natalie Muric, Pascaline Laure Tchienehom, Dragos Stoica
Model editor: Andreea Pasăre
Note editor: Achilles Dougalis

Agenda

Discussion

  • An Introduction about the action point in the previous working group meeting on eAccess was presented.

  • With regard to the action point mentioned above, a new conceptual model that contains group and subgroup identifiers was presented.

4vnqxkgltaOIwAAAAASUVORK5CYII=

  • At the instance level, part of the general yearly turnover selection criteria was presented:

87NmWbDO9yMAAAAASUVORK5CYII=

  • It was pointed out that this modeling creates a Question instance with no data except of the identifier (to cover the subgroup gathering classes used in the ESPD implementation) so it was suggested to have the identifiers at the Question level resulting in the following diagram:

ADvS5MwgqIWHAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC

  • There were some doubts regarding the new model:

    • QuestionGroup and Question may not be semantically the same. A QuestionGroup is a structure and does not represent Content. In other words, QuestionGroup will not have a value, just an identifier. On the other hand, a Question will have a value.

    • Another opinion expressed is that the new presented model is more simple, therefore better. Also there would not be many nested Question groups. Less is more.

  • A third solution to simplify the previous version was created in the diagrams below:

06hnujdMi9vAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC
9CCTXlBINFgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==

  • It was mentioned that all the existing conceptual diagrams of eAccess can be consulted in the ePO repository on the development branch.

  • It was stated that in the ePO :

    • The model should represent the concepts that are used to accommodate data from an ESPD request.

    • The model should not represent technical implementations or processes. It is not at the same level as the ESPD-EDM model. However, they should be aligned.

    • The model should include the data required to fulfill the needs of the Ontology Requirements Specification Document (ORSD).

Action Points

  • Create new instance diagrams for some ESPD criteria (general yearly turnover, and others) by using the CCCEV model.

  • Create a high level description about the module(s) to be presented in working group meetings.