From maryv at icpsr.umich.edu Thu Apr 14 08:53:25 2005 From: maryv at icpsr.umich.edu (Mary Vardigan) Date: Thu Apr 14 08:53:44 2005 Subject: [DDI-CDG] Attendance in Edinburgh -- Check this list Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.2.20050414082234.02125ec0@icpsr.umich.edu> Dear DDI Expert Committee and Working Groups, We are trying to gauge the number of DDI participants in the upcoming meetings in Edinburgh. Here is my best guess at this point about who is attending. Please let Sue Hodge (shodge@icpsr.umich.edu) know if you are not on this list but should be or vice versa. Please also let her know if you will be arriving late. Note that we have some new people participating in some of the working groups. --Mary Attending the DDI Meetings -- Sunday, May 22, and Monday, May 23 Iris Alfredsson Atle Alvheim Bill Bradley San Cannon (lunch Monday) Gina Cheung Mark Diggory Ilona Einowski (p.m. Sunday) Janet Eisenhauer J. Gager Gretchen Gano (p.m. Sunday) Ann Green (p.m. Sunday) Arofan Gregory Reto Hadorn Pascal Heus Lon Hofmann Sanda Ionescu Mari Kleemola I-Lin Kuo Marc Maynard Kate McNeill-Harman Ken Miller Meinhard Moschner Tom Piazza Ed Ross Jostein Ryssevik Wendy Thomas Mike Trotman Joachim Wackerow Oliver Watteler Mary Vardigan Director, Collection Delivery Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) University of Michigan P.O. Box 1248, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1248 Phone: 734-615-7908 Fax: 734-647-8200 www.icpsr.umich.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-cdg/attachments/20050414/d0402333/attachment.html From mari.kleemola at uta.fi Fri Apr 15 06:26:44 2005 From: mari.kleemola at uta.fi (Mari Kleemola) Date: Fri Apr 15 06:26:46 2005 Subject: [DDI-CDG] Some summaries Message-ID: <425F96E4.7080400@uta.fi> Hi all! As the Alliance meeting is approaching, I've been reading through the CDG papers. It is obvious that we still lack shared concepts but the good thing is that we seem to at least implicitly know what we are talking about. Being quite inexperienced in the field of documenting complec surveys, I find the discussion so far interesting but a bit confusing. To clarify my own thoughts, I wrote a couple of summary papers. I am not at all sure whether I have caught all the essential ideas (or that those I have caught I have understood right), but I've attached the summaries here in the hope that they might prove helpful for the group and for our discussions. In the first paper I present just another way to think about the survey typology and try to sum up the terms used. The second paper is a collection of the "demands" to DDI, listed by the papers I found them in. I thought this could help in deciding about possible new elements/structures needed etc. For example the references/links between different levels seems to pop up quite often. In the end of Reto's paper "Handling the repeated cross-national datasets (draft 3, Hadorn, 7.3.2005)" he mentions the "demands to EKKE", would be interesting to know more about them. All the best, Mari -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CDG_summary_demands_April2005_mk.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 29696 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-cdg/attachments/20050415/69336c61/CDG_summary_demands_April2005_mk-0001.xls -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CDG_thoughts_April2005_mk.rtf Type: application/msword Size: 48336 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-cdg/attachments/20050415/69336c61/CDG_thoughts_April2005_mk-0001.dot From moschner at za.uni-koeln.de Fri Apr 15 09:59:17 2005 From: moschner at za.uni-koeln.de (Meinhard Moschner) Date: Fri Apr 15 09:51:03 2005 Subject: [DDI-CDG] Some summaries In-Reply-To: <425F96E4.7080400@uta.fi> References: <425F96E4.7080400@uta.fi> Message-ID: <425FC8B5.6070209@za.uni-koeln.de> Dear Mari, dear all, many thanks for your discussion input. I have added a few comments to your first (terms/concepts) paper, emphasizing the central concepts. Still have to go through the discussion compilation. The items put into one row don't necessarily relate to each other - right? Have a nice weekend Meinhard Mari Kleemola schrieb: > Hi all! > > As the Alliance meeting is approaching, I've been reading through the > CDG papers. It is obvious that we still lack shared concepts but the > good thing is that we seem to at least implicitly know what we are > talking about. > > Being quite inexperienced in the field of documenting complec surveys, I > find the discussion so far interesting but a bit confusing. To clarify > my own thoughts, I wrote a couple of summary papers. I am not at all > sure whether I have caught all the essential ideas (or that those I have > caught I have understood right), but I've attached the summaries here in > the hope that they might prove helpful for the group and for our > discussions. > > In the first paper I present just another way to think about the survey > typology and try to sum up the terms used. The second paper is a > collection of the "demands" to DDI, listed by the papers I found them > in. I thought this could help in deciding about possible new > elements/structures needed etc. For example the references/links between > different levels seems to pop up quite often. > > In the end of Reto's paper "Handling the repeated cross-national > datasets (draft 3, Hadorn, 7.3.2005)" he mentions the "demands to EKKE", > would be interesting to know more about them. > > All the best, > Mari > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > DDI-CDG mailing list > DDI-CDG@icpsr.umich.edu > http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/mailman/listinfo/ddi-cdg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CDG_thoughts_April2005_mk_mm.rtf Type: application/msword Size: 61681 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-cdg/attachments/20050415/439d7799/CDG_thoughts_April2005_mk_mm-0001.dot From mari.kleemola at uta.fi Mon Apr 18 01:13:18 2005 From: mari.kleemola at uta.fi (Mari Kleemola) Date: Mon Apr 18 01:13:12 2005 Subject: [DDI-CDG] Some summaries In-Reply-To: <425FC8B5.6070209@za.uni-koeln.de> References: <425F96E4.7080400@uta.fi> <425FC8B5.6070209@za.uni-koeln.de> Message-ID: <426341EE.60307@uta.fi> Meinhard Moschner wrote: > Still have to go through the discussion compilation. The items put into > one row don't necessarily relate to each other - right? You're right, Meinhard, items in a row in the excel file do not necessarily relate to each other. They are now in the order I've found them in the papers. The logical next step is of course to organise the items into groups, but unfortunately I have not had the time to finish that. - Mari From watteler at za.uni-koeln.de Fri Apr 29 11:40:56 2005 From: watteler at za.uni-koeln.de (Oliver Watteler) Date: Fri Apr 29 11:42:31 2005 Subject: [DDI-CDG] List of studies and examples of scenarios Message-ID: <42725588.2070100@za.uni-koeln.de> Dear CDG, I am finally able to send out the two things we agreed on at the end of our last conference call. We said that we will continue our work once we get a hold of the draft for DDI 3, but this does not work. DDI's XML developer needs our scenarios first to fill in some gaps. Well then, here we go. I have attached the following documents: 1. A list of "comparative" studies that also contains Reto's nomenclature as far as I have understood it. Wendy has also drafted a list of comparative studies in form of a table and I will fit "my" studies into her list in order to get an overview of comparative or comparable surveys that are out there. This list has to be enhanced by you. Are you interested in the methodological information I used (mostly from the different web-sites)? 2. Some examples of scenarios where information is being compared. When we talked about those scenarios, my understanding was that we want to break down the study life cycle phases to the working steps and do not want to stay on the general level of theoretical or methodological comparison. We want do go down to the single information level also to see what can already be documented with the current DDI and what is still missing. I attached a list of four tables, which have to be read as follows. The aim should be to come up with a complete description of a comparative study?s life cycle that shows all working steps at a level where they match information bits that in turn can be fit into DDI tags. Now, the tables you see contain some of those single steps and not entire cycle phase. Thus, my example 1 only talks about the agreement on questions that serve as indicators. Of course phase 1, which is called ?Concept? in the DDI life cycle model, also implies the gathering of information (e.g. literature), the drafting of hypothesis or the ?assembly? of a questionnaire. Those would be other working steps I could think of and they too could be fit into tables. One thing that we do not want to do, I suppose, is to go through the development process of DDI 1 once again and think of all those things that could possibly be compared, but stick to the real world and think of the information bits which are really held against each other. Talking to Meinhard about the examples I realized that this lengthy explanation was necessary. Maybe it would also be useful to insert the existing DDI tags that are useful for comparison into tables like the ones presented. What do you think? The list of studies could be used to see how those studies could be marked up with DDI (as has already been done in some case and has also been discussed in the context of best practise examples). To talk about the time frame. We will meet in Edinburgh on May, 22nd. We should organize at least one more confernece call before that and try to come up with as many scenarios as possible. I will take up the job to compile them afterwards. Any other things you can thinks of that need to be done? Have a nice week-end, yours Oliver. P.S.: Wendy! Thanks for the information. I will send around your enhanced table next week. -- GESIS - Zentralarchiv f?r Empirische Sozialforschung (ZA) Oliver Watteler, M.A. Dokumentation und Archivierung /Documentation and Archiving Bachemer Str.40 50931 K?ln Tel.:++49-221-47694-76 FAX :++49-221-47694-44 Web :http://www.gesis.org/za -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Scenarios for comparison_examples.doc Type: application/msword Size: 96768 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-cdg/attachments/20050429/4c161b61/Scenariosforcomparison_examples-0001.doc -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Comparative studies_examples.doc Type: application/msword Size: 39936 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/pipermail/ddi-cdg/attachments/20050429/4c161b61/Comparativestudies_examples-0001.doc From watteler at za.uni-koeln.de Fri Apr 29 11:45:14 2005 From: watteler at za.uni-koeln.de (Oliver Watteler) Date: Fri Apr 29 11:46:32 2005 Subject: [DDI-CDG] Just great ... Message-ID: <4272568A.2020708@za.uni-koeln.de> Sorry, but I completely forgot to thank Reto for his synopsis and Mari for her comments to all the information we have gathered so far. We should integrate their remarks and questions in our call in order to clarify things. Greetings, Oliver. -- GESIS - Zentralarchiv f?r Empirische Sozialforschung (ZA) Oliver Watteler, M.A. Dokumentation und Archivierung /Documentation and Archiving Bachemer Str.40 50931 K?ln Tel.:++49-221-47694-76 FAX :++49-221-47694-44 Web :http://www.gesis.org/za