1. Workshop on International Collaboration for Standards-Based Modernisation Geneva, May 2015 SDMX GLOSSARY New Central Reference Point for SDMX Terminology David.BARRACLOUGH@oecd.org Danny.DELCAMBRE@ec.europa.eu

2. The SDMX Metadata Common Vocabulary (MCV) was published in January 2009 as Annex 4 to the SDMX Content-Oriented Guidelines Basic philosophy: Set of concepts and related definitions used in structural and reference metadata To recommend a common terminology for improving communication and understanding. Main problem faced when developed: Not much practical experience in terms of use and implementation Governance and ownership not very well defined In 2014, based on experience and use cases gained, the uptick in SDMX adoption, and the newly-defined SDMX working groups, it was decided to change the MCV Background

3. Why change ? SDMX Glossary 2015 SDMX Glossary should be restricted to SDMX-specific terminology and concepts The SDMX glossary should be the sole repository for SDMX terminology A separate glossary should deal with non-SDMX terms New SDMX methodological material has been made available since 2009 -> revision needed Clarifications, corrections, improvements, harmonisation, etc. needed Relevant governance and ownership in place for future revisions Relevant SDMX SWG ownership Possible governance and revision charter

4. Why do we need an SDMX Glossary ? Common and harmonised language for building and understanding SDMX data exchange arrangements of statistical organisations A reference tool for using and mapping terminology found in SDMX Data Structure Definitions (DSDs), Code Lists and other SDMX artefacts Single entry point to a common SDMX terminology to facilitate communication and understanding A tool and standard for modernising the statistical industry, and relevant to the strategy of the UNECE Modernisation Committee on Standards In short 1.if a term is used in SDMX exchange, then its precise meaning should correspond to the SDMX Glossary definition; 2.any reference to a particular phenomenon described in the SDMX Glossary should use the appropriate term In short 1.if a term is used in SDMX exchange, then its precise meaning should correspond to the SDMX Glossary definition; 2.any reference to a particular phenomenon described in the SDMX Glossary should use the appropriate term

5. What do we mean with the word "Glossary" ? DESIGNATION Neutral: scientific name ( Felis silvestris catus ) mathematical formula picture etc. Linguistic: cat котка γάτα etc. DESCRIPTION SOURCE A cat is a small four - legged furry animal with claws and whiskers, kept as a pet. Harrap's Essential English Dictionary, 1995 DETAIL SOURCE Wikipedia The "terminology layers" Semantic relationships with other concepts Broad Term (BT) : Animal Narrow Term (NT) : Angora, Chartreux, etc. Related Term (RT)-: Wildcat (Simplified model)

6. How is the Glossary organised ? * = Mandatory information * * *

7. Methodological principles for the revision ? A concept should be included in the glossary only if it is used in the general context of SDMX Concepts used in the SDMX information model should be included in the Glossary Concepts used in the reference metadata frameworks of the SDMX sponsor organisations (e.g. "Institutional mandate", "Sector coverage") should be covered by the glossary All definitions to be accompanied with explanatory information (field called Context) No technicalities in the "Definition" and "Context" fields. Implementers are referred to the SDMX technical documentation

8. How was the revision exercise conducted ? In March 2014 an ad hoc Task Force made of members of the SDMX Statistical Working Group (SWG), SDMX Technical Working Group (TWG), and other metadata/SDMX experts was set up. The input documents were: The 2009 (current) MCV An initial proposal for discussion to remove and add relevant terms from the 2009 MCV -> the SDMX Glossary v0.1 A glossary of SDMX technical terms provided by the TWG A 2009 mapping of IMF, Eurostat, OECD and SDMX ref. metadata terms

9. Working and Review Procedure Working practice: 2-3 hour web-based « sprint » sessions. Milestones: 1.Start first pass through the SDMX Glossary v0.1 term-by-term 2.A second pass started through the SDMX Glossary term-by-term 3.Pass the document to the editor -> SDMX Glossary (edited) 4.Step through the SDMX Glossary (edited), only the parked terms and outstanding actions Parallel work to resolve actions on parked terms -> direct to the editor for incorporation before next sprint session Review procedure: Public consultation through SDMX.org Written procedure to SDMX Secretariat and sponsors.

10. How to publish ? The SDMX Glossary will be made publicly available in various forms: As a SDMX Concept Scheme stored in the SDMX Global Registry As a download document from http://sdmx.org and/or UNECE web pages dedicated to the Modernisation Committee on Standardshttp://sdmx.org As a subset of the CODED (COncepts and DEfinitions Database) database maintained by Eurostat Other channels ?

11. Lessons learnt from the exercise Review procedure took far longer than expected: 19 sprints so far = Ironman triathlon? Intensive on-line editing sessions for the sprint master (me!) Word docs have nice comments, tracked changes, and are ubiquitous, although far from the best tool for this No individual term editing history Can’t link directly to glossary terms Can’t do collaborative editing – each person blocks the entire document Tried to manage collaboration on the doc through the UNECE wiki, though some people still send it by email -> nightmare to merge the individual word documents It’s 2015 – is there a good, accessible tool would allow: Task force to easily collaborate and advance outside of sprints Less manual editing required by the project/sprint leader Links to the glossary terms for easy sharing Term edit history, comparison, comments UNECE wiki? Google Docs?

12. Some questions How to ensure that the SDMX Glossary is used and well-referenced, especially in place of the 2009 MCV? How to revise the SDMX Glossary in the future? This seemed to be a problem with the MCV - should we create some form of a revision charter with rules? Look to the ownership group example for version revision frequency? How can the SDMX Glossary and forthcoming Metadata Glossary reinforce each other and drive standards modernisation in the future? How can the SDMX Glossary drive metadata-driven or machine-oriented processes? For example, could a glossary revision create a trigger event leading to automatic refresh of metadata and processes?

13. THANK YOU !