1. GSIM Mapping to SDMX and DDI: Preliminary Findings and Status Arofan Gregory Metadata Technology METIS, May 6-8 2013, Geneva

2. Outline Working process Goals Business Group Concepts Group Production Group Structures Group Conclusions

3. Working Process Group includes representatives from NSIs, international organizations, central banks, and standards bodies – Includes active implementers Meets bi-weekly via conference calls Split into two groups – GSIM-DDI and GSIM SDMX Significant cross-membership to ease coordination

4. Goals GSIM 1.0 had some initial mappings against various standards (incl. DDI and SDMX) – This is the basis of the current work Will produce a mapping table from GSIM to DDI, GSIM to SDMX Locate gaps for each standard, provide feedback to standards bodies Find any gaps in the GSIM model itself Support the GSIM “plug & play” cases

5. Design Principles Support from one standard is enough – Both DDI and SDMX do not need to support everything No “forced” mappings – If strong semantics don’t exist, identify as a gap

6. Business Group Statistical Activity and Design – Not well-supported by DDI, but support should be better in future versions – SDMX has a very generic process model Data collection area is well-supported by DDI, little or no coverage from SDMX Specification of needs – DDI is weak, documentary not machine-actionable – Requirements will be passed to the DDI Alliance – Could use SDMX Reference Metadata to support this, but no explicit support

7. Concepts Group Major gap: classification management Otherwise, good support from DDI Reasonable support from SDMX but no distinction between codes and categories Populations, statistical units not well supported We expect strong alignment with future versions of DDI (some changes already to DDI 3.2 in public review)

8. Production Group Not good “actionable” metadata in SDMX or DDI Gaps here are not critical – Other standards support this better BPMN BPEL We expect better support from DDI in future – DDI 3.2 offers some better support than 3.2 SDMX has a process model, but not as much detail

9. Structures Group The best coverage for GSIM is in this part of the model – Data sets – Data structures This is the key metadata from the standards perspective – Also for many implementations Dissemination better described by SDMX than by DDI – We do not expect DDI to support this function

10. Conclusions Fair coverage by standards in some areas Identified gaps will, where necessary, result in requirements being passed to the standards organizations Further work is needed to complete the mapping/analysis GSIM will provide a good model for convergence of standards in future