[DDI-ADG] FW: Survey Research tools

[Wendy Thomas]

when I said vetted I ment vetted by the geographers. It didn't get into
DDI because of the problem you noted.

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Sanda Ionescu wrote:

> Hi, all.
> I guess I need to give some clarifications because I *do* remember.
> Actually the point|line|polygon bit was NOT vetted. It was just
> inappropriately placed, so to speak.
> In Version 2.0 geogCover is REPEATABLE although it is meant to indicate
> *total* coverage. That's (at least to me it is) the misleading and maybe
> inappropriate bit. If it's TOTAL how can it be repeatable - it's a
> contradiction. The point|line|polygon bit was supposed to be an
> attribute of geogCover. But since at the time we could not agree on what
> geoCover was really supposed to contain (total coverage? or individual
> geographic levels? Or what?) we chose to drop the "geotype" attribute
> (container of the point|line|polygon choice).
> Right now for Version 3.0 we have clearly specified both total coverage
> AND individual levels, so I really don't see any problem in attaching
> this string to each and every level.
> I hope this helps.
> Sanda.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ddi-adg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu
> [mailto:ddi-adg-bounces at icpsr.umich.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 2:59 PM
> To: Mary Vardigan
> Cc: ddi-adg at icpsr.umich.edu
> Subject: Re: [DDI-ADG] FW: Survey Research tools
>
> re: point line polygon
> You may want to go back and look at what was originally proposed for
> this
> from the original geography workgroup created in the previous DDI
> structure. The group consisted of a number of well known geographers as
> well as myself and Peter Granda. In that sense its been vetted as doing
> what was required by the geographers.
>
> wendy
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Mary Vardigan wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: John Spencer [mailto:spence2 at email.unc.edu]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 2:08 PM
> > To: Mary Vardigan
> > Subject: Re: Survey Research tools
> >
> >
> >
> > Mary,
> > For the most part, I think the information would be stored in a text
> > field. The one exception that I can think of is the spatial primitive
> > descriptions. Those will be either point, line or polygons.
> >
> > John
> >
> > Mary Vardigan wrote:
> >
> > John,
> >
> >
> >
> > The DDI Working Group on geography has been discussing your document
> and
> > was wondering if you have requirements for "machine-actionability" and
> > typing on any of your information elements. It is of course easy to
> set
> > that up for dates, but less clear for some of the other elements.
> Could
> > you live with much of this just being included as text (for example,
> > field collection description/limitations seems as if it would almost
> > always be a text field). Or would you want controlled vocabularies for
> > some elements like field collection protocols? If the latter, are
> there
> > standard sources that we could link to for the vocabularies?
> >
> >
> >
> > Any other thoughts you may have on this are welcomed. We found your
> > document very useful.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mary
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: John Spencer [mailto:spence2 at email.unc.edu]
> > Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 2:22 PM
> > To: Mary Vardigan
> > Cc: john_spencer at unc.edu; Gina-Qian Cheung; Sue Ellen Hansen;
> > edv at unc.edu; phil_bardsley at unc.edu; Beth-Ellen Pennell
> > Subject: Re: Survey Research tools
> >
> >
> >
> > Mary and others,
> > Here is the document I wrote with Phil Page (the director of the
> Spatial
> > Analysis Unit here at CPC) that outlines some scenarios where spatial
> > data was part of a survey and key things we'd need to know to use the
> > data effectively. What we tried to do was present the things that we'd
> > want to know if we were presented with spatial data from the
> scenarios.
> > Each scenario reflects examples we have encountered here at the
> Spatial
> > Analysis Unit. Our assumption was that the spatial component
> > corresponded to one (or more) records in the database. I should point
> > out, that this assumption is by no means the only way spatial data
> could
> > be associate with a survey. There could be contextual information
> that's
> > integrated with the survey that comes from spatial databases, e.g.
> > Census, Land Cover, Elevation, etc that is at the survey level and not
> > at the respondent level.
> >
> > Anyway, hope this helps clarify some issues. I think the addition of
> > spatial data capabilities would represent a valuable advancement for
> > DDI. If you have any questions or would like more information, or if
> > there's additional help I can provide, just let me know.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > John Spencer
> > Senior Spatial Analyst
> > Carolina Population Center
> > University of North Carolina
> > 123 W. Franklin St.
> > Chapel Hill, NC 27516 USA
> > 919.966.1721
> >
> >
> >
> > Mary Vardigan wrote:
> >
> > John,
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you so much for your reply about spatial data and the DDI. We
> are
> > in the midst of compiling requirements for Version 3.0 of the DDI, and
> > we are very much interested in treating geographic and spatial data in
> a
> > more robust way in the new version. It would be great if you could
> send
> > me a copy of your document on spatial data and survey research, even
> if
> > it isn't intended to be a set of proposed tags. As you mention, just
> > knowing the right questions to think about is important. Thank you so
> > much for offering your expertise in this area.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mary
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: Beth-Ellen Pennell
> > Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 5:49 PM
> > To: spence2 at email.unc.edu; Phil Bardsley
> > Cc: Gina-Qian Cheung; Sue Ellen Hansen; Ed Van Duinen; John Spencer;
> > Mary Vardigan
> > Subject: RE: Survey Research tools
> >
> >
> >
> > John -- thank-you for this.  I have cc:d Mary Vardigan who heads the
> DDI
> > effort.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >
> >
> > Beth-Ellen
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: John Spencer [mailto:spence2 at email.unc.edu]
> > Sent: Thu 11/3/2005 3:38 PM
> > To: Phil Bardsley
> > Cc: Beth-Ellen Pennell; Gina-Qian Cheung; Sue Ellen Hansen; Ed Van
> > Duinen; John Spencer
> > Subject: Re: Survey Research tools
> >
> > Greetings all,
> > I wanted to follow-up on our discussion on the inclusion of spatial
> data
> > in DDI, and send, as requested, a brief paragraph about the unique
> needs
> > of spatial data. As we mentioned on the phone, there's a lot of
> > information about spatial data that's vital to know before it can be
> > used most effectively. That's true for all types of spatial data,
> > whether it's a latitude and longitude coordinate collected using a GPS
> > receiver or contextual information obtained from census or other
> source.
> > For instance, knowing the coordinate system and datum of the
> coordinate
> > is essential. In addition, other information such as error correction
> > method employed for GPS coordinates or the offset employed by the
> > geocoding service are key pieces of information that permit the
> spatial
> > data to be used accurately. These are just a couple of examples, but
> > there are others. In fact, enough examples that we think incorporating
> > tags in DDI v.3 that accommodate the unique needs of spatial data
> would
> > be a tremendous advancement in the functionality of DDI.
> >
> >
> > If you'd like more information or details just let us know. We have
> > developed a document which outlines some of the scenarios of how
> spatial
> > data can be included in survey research and what information about
> > spatial data is important to know about each scenario.Its not a set of
> > proposed tags, but it should illustrate some of the questions that we
> > ask and would like to know when we use spatial data. If it would be
> > helpful we can provide it.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > John Spencer
> > Senior Spatial Analyst
> > Carolina Population Center
> > University of North Carolina
> > 123 W. Franklin St.
> > Chapel Hill, NC 27516 USA
> > 919.966.1721
> >
> >
> >
> > Phil Bardsley wrote:
> >
> > Hi Beth-Ellen et al.,
> >
> > It was great talking with you, too. The more people we talk with about
> > this idea, the more people we find who are working on the same sort of
> > tools. We will certainly plan to attend IASSIST. Meanwhile, we'd like
> to
> > contact the NCHS folks and learn more about their product. If you can
> > recommend someone to talk with there, we'd appreciate it.
> >
> > I'll forward your proposal for DDI v. 3 to Phil Schumm at the
> University
> > of Chicago, whom I mentioned in our conversation. His group may have
> > some useful ideas to contribute.
> >
> > Thanks again for taking the time to talk with us.
> >
> > Phil
> >
> > Beth-Ellen Pennell wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Phil:
> >
> > It was great talking to you all this week about your project.  I have
> > talked with Mary Vardigan who directs the overall DDI project for
> ICPSR.
> >
> > I have also cc:'d her on this message. Mary said that the plan is to
> > have version 3 of the DDI ready for public comment at the end of May
> > when the IASSIST conference is held in Ann Arbor (which we encourage
> you
> >
> > to attend -- excellent way to meet folks working in this area).  The
> > public comment period will be for about two months.  Plans to
> > advertise/promote are still in preliminary stages.  Ideas are welcome.
> > Mary is happy to discuss this further or answer any questions you
> might
> > have.
> >
> > Good luck with your project and please keep in touch.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Beth-Ellen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > John Spencer
> > Senior Spatial Analyst
> > Carolina Population Center
> > University of North Carolina
> > 123 W. Franklin St.
> > Chapel Hill, NC 27516 USA
> > 919.966.1721
> >
>
> Wendy L. Thomas                          Phone: +1 612.624.4389
> Data Access Core Director		 Fax:   +1 612.626.8375
> Minnesota Population Center              Email: wlt at pop.umn.edu
> University of Minnesota
> 50 Willey Hall
> 225 19th Avenue South
> Minneapolis, MN 55455
>
> _______________________________________________
> DDI-ADG mailing list
> DDI-ADG at icpsr.umich.edu
> http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/mailman/listinfo/ddi-adg
>

Wendy L. Thomas                          Phone: +1 612.624.4389
Data Access Core Director		 Fax:   +1 612.626.8375
Minnesota Population Center              Email: wlt at pop.umn.edu
University of Minnesota
50 Willey Hall
225 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455