profile
viewpoint
If you are wondering where the data of this site comes from, please visit https://api.github.com/users/Fak3/events. GitMemory does not store any data, but only uses NGINX to cache data for a period of time. The idea behind GitMemory is simply to give users a better reading experience.

Fak3/django-sphinx 2

A transparent layer for full-text search using Sphinx and Django

Fak3/dagr 1

a deviantArt image downloader script written in Python

Fak3/demorest 1

demo geo django rest project using backbone.js with pagination

Fak3/dumblock 1

redis lock decorators for django

epogrebnyak/cbr-soap-py 0

SOAP interface to Bank of Russia online data

Fak3/aggregator 0

System for aggregating data and storing into S3 and loading into frontend database

Fak3/aiojobs 0

Jobs scheduler for managing background task (asyncio)

Fak3/AppImageKit 0

Using AppImageKit you can package desktop applications as AppImages that run on common Linux-based operating systems, such as RHEL, CentOS, Ubuntu, Fedora, debian and derivatives.

Fak3/app_state 0

Minimalistic reactive local application state toolkit

Fak3/argotlunar 0

Surreal transformations of audio streams

issue commentOpen-Attestation/open-attestation

BUG: "The property openAttestationMetadata in the input was not defined in the context"

Add type "OpenAttestationCredential" to the top-level object

Neketek

comment created time in a month

startedopenSUSE/SUSEPrime

started time in a month

issue commentw3c/vc-data-model

`notTransferable` property not defined in `@context`

I forget if scoped protected contexts can be additive...

Unfortunately, they can't be. Specifically, you can't "add" to a term's scoped context without fully redefining the whole term which usually runs afoul of @protection rules (for good reason). We tried to get additive-only changes to a term's scoped-context into JSON-LD 1.1, but it couldn't make the cut. It would have been nice for things like credentialSubject in VCs. Maybe it will be in a future version.

Issue to track: https://github.com/w3c/json-ld-syntax/issues/361

David-Chadwick

comment created time in 2 months

startedSlicer/Slicer

started time in 2 months

starteds-leger/archipack

started time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Example for subset context needed

This example uses inline context: https://github.com/edi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr/pull/58/files

AP-G

comment created time in 2 months

push eventFak3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

u1

commit sha 8bafac5ba19ac0932e1be3135f7a3fd110af4f44

Use qudt: for liters and contentUnitQuantity for bottles refs https://github.com/gs-gs/ha-igl-project/issues/261 refs https://github.com/edi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr/issues/62

view details

push time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

packaging, quantity units and datatypes

partially related: #14

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Fixed units for weight, length, temperature and duration

Huge thread discussing new measurement unit aware datatypes: https://github.com/w3c/sparql-12/issues/129

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Fixed units for weight, length, temperature and duration

https://gs1.github.io/UnitConverterUNECERec20/ is a javascript lib showcase which supports 722 units and 51 physical properties from rec20 codelist

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

startedqudt/qudt-public-repo

started time in 2 months

startedHajoRijgersberg/OM

started time in 2 months

issue openededi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

packaging, quantity units and datatypes

For the VI1 wine certificate we need to express the quantity in liters and the total number of bottles: Screenshot_20210714_133827

I am puzzled to find a proper way to represent quantity with the UN/CEFACT vocabulary.

First issue is unclear definition and relationships between Product vs ProductInstance vs TradeLineItem:

  • Product: Any tangible output or service produced by human or mechanical effort or by a natural process.
  • ProductInstance: An instance of an individual product or batch of similar products produced by human or mechanical effort or by a natural process
  • TradeLineItem: A collection of information specific to an item being used or reported on for trade purposes.

Currently Product has multiple relevant properties:

  • contentUnitQuantity: The number of content units of this trade product

    I can't find a definition of content unit. Is bottle a content unit? What if we need to specify product quantity measured in multiple different content units - i.e. number of bottles and number of boxes?

  • includedProductContentUnitQuantity: The number of content units of products included in this trade product

    I believe that this field only applies when this compound product has another product included within (referenced with includedProduct property). This field is confusing and a duplicate of directly specifying contentUnitQuantity on the included property. Perhaps we can delete this property.

  • innerPackContentUnitQuantity: The number of content units in an inner pack of this trade product

    Probably irrelevant to our usecase for bottles\liters, but can be clarified what an inner pack is - a box, a box within a box?

  • innerPackQuantity: The number of inner packs of this trade product

    Same. Definition of inner pack is needed

  • physicalFormDescription: A textual description of the physical form of this trade product

    Shouldn't this field belong to ProductInstance instead of Product?

  • unitQuantity: A unit quantity of this referenced product.

    This seems to be a duplicate of contentUnitQuantity, which came from the merge of Product and ReferencedProduct. We should remove this field.

  • unitTypeCode: A code specifying a type of unit for this trade product.

    This is currently a string. Shouldn't this code have a relevant codelist assigned?

And one candidate property in the ProductInstance domain:

  • actualQuantity: The actual quantity of items in this trade product instance.

    If product instance is just a single bottle, then what does this field mean? If an instance is a box, then what is the difference between this field and Product.applicablePackaging.totalUnitQuantity? Which one should be used in the credential?

created time in 2 months

issue openededi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Certificate has incorrect rdfs:comment

        {
            "@id": "uncefact:Certificate",
            "@type": "rdfs:Class",
            "rdfs:comment": "A legal proof of ownership or worthiness of an item.",
            "rdfs:label": "Certificate",
            "uncefact:cefactElementMetadata": [
                {
                    "@id": "cefact:Product_Certificate.Details",
                    "@type": "uncefact:AggregateBIE",
                    "uncefact:cefactUNId": "cefact:UN01012483",
                    "rdfs:comment": "A collection of data for a piece of written, printed or electronic matter that provides information or evidence about the product.",
                    "uncefact:cefactBusinessProcess": "Traceability"
                }
            ]
        },

Certificate class has rdfs:comment "A legal proof of ownership or worthiness of an item.", but the cefactElementMetadata comment is different, and corresponds to the RDM xml file. Where does the class comment came from?

created time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

formattedFormattedLatestProductDataChangeDateTime has wrong range uncefact:UNCL2379Code

partially related to #51 and #47

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

issue openededi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

formattedFormattedLatestProductDataChangeDateTime has wrong range uncefact:UNCL2379Code

formattedFormattedLatestProductDataChangeDateTime has desctiption "The formatted date, time, date time, or other date time value of the latest change in the product data for this trade product", and thus must have range of xsd:DateTime. Currently it has incorrect range of uncefact:UNCL2379Code which describes various formatting patterns of date\time, e.g. MMDDYYY / DDMMYY, etc.

created time in 2 months

issue openededi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Product and ProductInstance are wrongly mixed in the HTML version of vocab

ProductInstance and Product are distinct classes according to RDM xml file and our generated json-ld vocabulary file. But in the html representation, the list of properties and relations of Product incorrectly lists properties that only belong to the ProductInstance domain, such as actualQuantity and appliedProcess (and some others)

created time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Data types need to be more explicit in the JSON-LD

This seems to be a duplicate of #47

onthebreeze

comment created time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

add @id and @type to the codelist files

This can be done with named graphs:

{
  "@context": { ... },
  "@id": "https://edi3.org/vocabulary/uncl4237.jsonld",
  "@type": "unece:Codelist",
  "generatedAt": "2012-04-09T00:00:00",
  "@graph": [ {}, {}, ... ]
onthebreeze

comment created time in 2 months

issue closededi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Replace rdfs:domain with schema:domainIncludes

By the rdfs definition, specifying multiple rdfs:domain for the property means that property can only appear on a node, which must be an instance of ALL specified classes. But the way we generate the vocabulary requires us to define that property can appear on a node, which is an instance of ANY of the specified domain classes.

E.g. this is incorrect:

     {
            "@id": "edi3:RelevantTradeParty",
            "@type": "rdfs:Property",
            "rdfs:domain": [
                "edi3:TradeSettlement",
                "edi3:TradeAgreement"
            ],
    }

We should replace rdfs:domain with schema:domainIncludes to express the optionality of the choice.

We should do the same for range - replace rdfs:range with schema:rangeIncludes

closed time in 2 months

Fak3

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Replace rdfs:domain with schema:domainIncludes

Done. Closing.

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

LOCODE Identifiers for countries

Related to #34

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

issue closededi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Merging duplicate entites from Buy-Ship-Pay Reference Data Model

Suggestion how we could handle duplicate entities from the Buy-Ship-Pay CEFACT Reference Data Model to be represented in edi3 vocabulary. In short, we link edi3 entities with old CEFACT entities using edi3:cefactID property.

BSP entities have Unique UN Assigned ID (in xls it is second column), we can use it to unambiguously link json-ld vocabulary term with BSP term.

For example of ReferencedConsignment and Consignment - remove these two classes:

{
  "@id": "edi3:Consignment",
  "edi3:cefactID": "UN01004159"
}

{
  "@id": "edi3:ReferencedConsignment",
  "edi3:cefactID": "UN01004040"
}

Add a new one with both UN ids linked to it:

{
  "@id": "edi3:Consignment",
  "edi3:cefactID": ["UN01004159", "UN01004040"]
}

And put a verbose description in the rdfs:comment:

{
  "rdfs:comment": "
    # Consignment
    
    ## Definition
    A separately identifiable collection of goods items to be transported or available
    to be transported from one consignor to one consignee in a supply chain via one or 
    more modes of transport where each consignment is the subject of one single transport 
    contract. 
    
    ## Mapping of Legacy CEFACT terms
    This Class should be used in place of the following Buy-Ship-Pay Reference
    Data Model entities:
    * UN01004159	ABIE	Supply Chain_ Consignment. Details
    * UN01004040	ABIE	Referenced_ Supply Chain_ Consignment. Details

  "
}

To aid software which translates from legacy CEFACT messages we would also maintain a mapping from old terms to the edi3 properties and classes, in form of json, csv and html page:

{
  "UN01004159": "edi3:Consignment",
  "UN01004040": "edi3:Consignment",
  "UN01004533": "edi3:PostalAddress",
  "UN01003173": "edi3:PostalAddress",
  // ...
}

closed time in 2 months

Fak3

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Merging duplicate entites from Buy-Ship-Pay Reference Data Model

This task is done. Duplicate entities are merged in the vocabulary.

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

issue closededi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Link edi3 vocabulary terms to the legacy CEFACT terms by UN id

For those developers coming from the legacy CEFACT background it would be useful to have a way to learn the exact mapping of the class or property from the BSP/MMT Reference Data Model to the class or property in the edi3 vocabulary.

I propose we add edi3:cefactID property to our vocabulary. This property will be used to associate class or property with the Unique UN Assigned ID:

{
      "@id": "edi3:FinancialInstitutionAddress",
      "@type": "rdfs:Class",
      "rdfs:comment": "The location at which a financial institution may be found or reached.",
      "rdfs:label": "Financial Institution_ Address. Details",
      "edi3:cefactID": "UN01003173"
}

related to #4

closed time in 2 months

Fak3

issue commentedi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Link edi3 vocabulary terms to the legacy CEFACT terms by UN id

We chose approach described in #12 to add UN/CEFACT metadata. Closing.

Fak3

comment created time in 2 months

PR opened edi3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

Add sample VI1 certificate document

Sample uses UN/CEFACT vocabulary to describe verifiable credential certificate

  • add vi1-vc-sample.json
  • Add proper Openattestaion types
  • add applicableTransportMeans to ConsignmentItem
  • add Product description
  • add Product actualQuantity
  • add product total sulphur dioxide
  • add product certificationEvidenceReferenceDocument
+131 -0

0 comment

1 changed file

pr created time in 2 months

create barnchFak3/edi3-json-ld-ndr

branch : vi-smample1

created branch time in 2 months

startedrednaks/django-async-orm

started time in 3 months