Advanced search
Connecting open data for solving the fiscal transparency puzzle in the EU
The promise of transparent administration and the creation of new business models, e.g. see also “Open Data Stories You Haven’t Heard”, are the fundamental drivers of the open data movement. Looking…
NEWSCreated: 21/02/2018Updated Date: 22/02/2018
Chatbots & Dialogue Systems
Find the official event page here: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/innovative-public-services/event/chatbots-dialogue-systems This workshop explains how public organisations can facilitate…
EVENTCreated: 02/06/2020Updated Date: 02/06/2020
Linked EU Budget Webinar
Publishing fiscal data in an open and reusable manner is key for achieving transparency in public administrations. The EU already has opened up its budget and part of its spending data. However, some…
EVENTCreated: 01/06/2018Updated Date: 29/06/2018
OpenBelgium 2018
Open Belgium is an annual event gathering industry, research, government and citizen stakeholders. It is a one-day community driven conference with talks, discussions, panels, workshops and become…
EVENTCreated: 21/02/2018Updated Date: 21/02/2018
Comments to the final draft of CPSV-AP v2.1
Description This issue was shared by Nicola Guarino via the mailing list: 1. Definition of public service and service identifier I raised this issue in the past, but it was never discussed in the WG, until the WG Governance Committee "decided to close this issue as there is no general need in the WG…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 31/10/2017Updated Date: 31/10/2017
Public service categories
Description This issue was raised by Alexandros Gerontas during the final CPSV-AP v2.0 revision webinar. He asked to include categories to classify public services, in addition to the events classification. Proposed solution As it implies bigger changes, we would propose to keep the model as it is…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 05/10/2017Updated Date: 05/10/2017
Service user and provider properties
Description This issue was raised by Nicola Guarino during the final CPSV-AP v2.0 revision webinar. He asked to include the service user to the specifications, and change the cardinality of the service provider property from 0..n to 1..n. In addition, he added that there are constraints concerning…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 05/10/2017Updated Date: 05/10/2017
Addition of properties to Contact Point class
Description This issue was raised by Alexandros Gerontas through the mailing list: I think the following properties might be added to the Contact Point class: Name, address, fax Proposed solution The properties name and fax already exist in the schema.org description of Contact Point - schema…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 18/09/2017Updated Date: 18/09/2017
Cardinality of the Has Contact Point property
Description This comment was made by Alexandros Gerontas through the mailing list: I think the cardinality of the property Has Contact Point should be 0..n. For example, a public service (PS) described once in a regional PS catalogue could have a different contact point at every regional unit…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 18/09/2017Updated Date: 18/09/2017
Errors on the second draft of the CPSV-AP
Description
The following errors were raised by Dieter De Paeper through the mailing list:
I see some confusion regarding the identifier attribute. From a previous joinup issue, I understood this as listing which entities should have explicit URIs as identifiers. They were things present in…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 18/09/2017Updated Date: 18/09/2017
Specialise the Related Service and Spatial properties
Description This issue was raised by Dieter De Paepe through the mailing list: The Related Service property is mapped to dct:relation, which has a pretty vague definition: "A related resource...". As this might overlap with other uses of dct:relation, I suggest subclassing this property. Same remark…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 18/09/2017Updated Date: 18/09/2017
Relate the Criterion Requirement and Evidence
Description This issue was raised by Karolina Wolniewicz through the mailing list: The Criterion Requirement is not related directly to the Evidences. In our opinion, they should be linked. Example: In Public Service “A” exists Criteria Requirement “R”, as so a user must provide the Evidence “E” to…
DISCUSSIONCreated: 18/09/2017Updated Date: 18/09/2017