Network Resource Vocabulary Development Group P&L: -1 (≃ -8 EUR)
The project provides a package with an evolution of versions of the vocabulary (latest being v3), to help categorize tables or collections of databases into categories based on the kinds of records, that they store. The vocabulary is derived, mostly, from the ideas linked, especially the "A Transdisciplinary Lingua Franca" idea.
It can be used simply annotating tables in the databases using them as part of database collection names or storing the labels as part of the collection or table metadata.
Currently, it is in use in some of our databases by naming collections, and using double-colon, in the following fashion. Suppose you have a database collection named table_name
, we just write:
table_name::v3/system:person
to indicate that this collection stores information about systems, that are persons. This is useful, especially in information retrieval, when there is large quantity of databases, each with a different structure, and is helpful to see, what each table is about at a glance.
The vocabulary also introduces the short codes from 100 to 600 to refer concisely to these category classes. For example, system:person
is 470 according to NRV v3. This is partly inspired by HTTP response codes: just like we can know the nature of response, wouldn't it be great, if a data packet that we receive would tell also the semantic information on what it is about?
Therefore, some time, once this vocabulary matures, this may make sense to introduce it as an RFC for a standard for semantic labeling of "data packets as records".
NOTE: Both the project 0oo, and the NRV are based on shared ideas, however, while 0oo takes on a monolithic approach to develop a self-sufficient single "Economy as an Ontology and an App", the NRV approach is that of looking back at the systems of the world that exist, and labeling all that while indexing them.
- Swapped the 300 with 400, due to ordering the logic in this idea.
- Introduced 600 by separating Locations from 100, as talked in this comment.