valueflows issueshttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues2024-02-14T16:15:05Zhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/713Upgrade examples section2024-02-14T16:15:05ZLynn FosterUpgrade examples sectionReview and correct existing examples for recent changes in relationship direction and other things. Add new examples as needed for further explanation. Some more developed use case based examples would be helpful, possibly in a differe...Review and correct existing examples for recent changes in relationship direction and other things. Add new examples as needed for further explanation. Some more developed use case based examples would be helpful, possibly in a different format, not sure.
Also, after this and #719 , re-run yaml validation on all examples.1.0.0-dochttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/662Intents vs Commitments2024-02-14T16:15:05ZLynn FosterIntents vs CommitmentsThis is either a documentation or a model issue, which I want to have some discussion on, or at least think about out loud. I think it can be a documentation issue, but want to make sure.
History:
1. Operational production planning, wi...This is either a documentation or a model issue, which I want to have some discussion on, or at least think about out loud. I think it can be a documentation issue, but want to make sure.
History:
1. Operational production planning, with Commitments and Processes, was an early part of VF, and has been implemented a number of times. Commitments are part of REA.
2. We added Intents (and Proposals) in response to the common use case of published offers/wants (mutual aid, marketplace, others). Intents are not part of REA.
3. We make Intents a "flow", and synced it up with Commitments and EconomicEvents, so that it can be part of an operational plan, basically representing a Commitment which is firmly planned, but to which no (usually provider) agent has committed or been assigned yet.
4. The Intents section of the model is very flexible, and supports various kinds of scenarios, as well as published offers/wants. One result is a lot of M:M relationships. Another result is that Intents run a big range of granularity and how close to being operational planning they are.
This has led to situations where we are technically using Intents for something that has been very concretely planned, usually by an organization, but not assigned yet. When assigned or committed to, there is excessive machinery involved to create a Commitment and hook it to the Intent. In other cases, Intents are very appropriate - when it is not sure it will happen; when more than one Agent will commit, etc.
Suggested way to think about those situations:
* There is a continuum of firmness, from idea to fulfillment. At some point, we can talk of Commitments. We have talked about Commitment being when both agents have committed. But...
* When making an operational plan, and there isn't really a question of some agent stepping up to commit or being assigned, then Commitments can be used, even though there may not be an agent committed yet. The criterion is firmness of plan, not commitments of agents.
* When drafting a plan, Plan can be used instead of Scenario, when there won't be several suggested plans to choose from, rather people will iterate the plan until it is finalized.
* If there will be several suggested plans, then use Scenario. It may be easier to generate a Plan from such a Scenario, once it is agreed upon, rather than using Satisfaction to hook them up. But either would work.1.0.0-docLynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/601need citation(s) for cfa... or remove from VF2024-02-14T16:15:04ZLynn Fosterneed citation(s) for cfa... or remove from VFFrom @bhaugen in SSB:
The model comes from Fernando Flores and some other people:
http://conversationsforaction.com/the-book
We got the diagram from http://www.itu.dk/people/kasper/REA2004/pospapers/PrasadJayaweera.pdf
(Used to have a ...From @bhaugen in SSB:
The model comes from Fernando Flores and some other people:
http://conversationsforaction.com/the-book
We got the diagram from http://www.itu.dk/people/kasper/REA2004/pospapers/PrasadJayaweera.pdf
(Used to have a citation in the VF intro, I think. @Lynn Foster we should have one.)
You can play with the protocol here:
http://conversationsforaction.com/cfa-playground1.0.0-docBob HaugenBob Haugenhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/699Make diagrams more accessible2024-02-14T16:15:04ZLynn FosterMake diagrams more accessibleWe got some feedback on the Valueflows Pie Story (a pdf generated from LibreOffice) that there were a lot of diagrams, but no way for a low vision person to understand them. There are a lot of diagrams in the main site too.
From the ch...We got some feedback on the Valueflows Pie Story (a pdf generated from LibreOffice) that there were a lot of diagrams, but no way for a low vision person to understand them. There are a lot of diagrams in the main site too.
From the chat:
An immediate improvement is to provide an alternative representation of each diagram, as best as possible.
On useful links, I think this article is a very good introduction: https://www.incobs.de/articles/items/diagram-a11y.html
Somewhat with a more specific application, by the same author, is http://www.oturn.net/top/index.html.
And a website with very good resources on a broader approach would be https://inclusivedesign.ca/.
Also:
https://fossheim.io/writing/posts/accessible-dataviz-d3-intro/
Background: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/create-accessible-pdfs-064625e0-56ea-4e16-ad71-3aa33bb4b7ed
Possibly LibreOffice has something comparable
Positive: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Accessibility/Creating_Accessible_LibreOffice_Files
Usually written into the metadata.1.0.0-dochttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/709Make links more expressive, not just "here"2024-02-14T16:15:04ZLynn FosterMake links more expressive, not just "here"A request from the Welcome chat:
If you walk over the documentation anyway, please try to avoid „here“ as a link text.
Screenreaders and other assistive technology often have a mode that allows them to jump from one link to another. „h...A request from the Welcome chat:
If you walk over the documentation anyway, please try to avoid „here“ as a link text.
Screenreaders and other assistive technology often have a mode that allows them to jump from one link to another. „here“ isn't very expressive on the target to them.1.0.0-docBob HaugenBob Haugenhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/596Add user definable label to units2024-02-10T16:50:36ZLynn FosterAdd user definable label to unitsWas: "one" vs "each"
We are considering what (if anything) to do about the semantics of "one" as the count/each/piece unit of measure in OM. We are also verifying what we understand about "one" with the OM team here github.com/HajoRijge...Was: "one" vs "each"
We are considering what (if anything) to do about the semantics of "one" as the count/each/piece unit of measure in OM. We are also verifying what we understand about "one" with the OM team here github.com/HajoRijgersberg/OM/issues/7. Started this issue since this is still open although we are merging the OM PR.
Expanding this to add a way for users to optionally define the labels their network wants for the OM2 units they use. This would cover "one". Also things like "pound (avoirdupois)". The rest would be from OM2, especially their id.
Maybe: vf:overrideLabel or similar?1.0.0Lynn FosterBob HaugenLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/703New example for tracking/tracing2024-02-10T16:50:36ZLynn FosterNew example for tracking/tracingFrom the fediverse:
"Any social media protocol should clearly explain how to sell milk with it. Luckily, the people at Valueflows are figuring it for ActivityPub see fep-d767. Unfortunately, the Valueflows folk talk about butchering co...From the fediverse:
"Any social media protocol should clearly explain how to sell milk with it. Luckily, the people at Valueflows are figuring it for ActivityPub see fep-d767. Unfortunately, the Valueflows folk talk about butchering cows. 😭 "
This refers to the example here https://www.valueflo.ws/algorithms/track/#tracking-identifier-and-lot.
Perhaps we need a different example, so as not to offend a set of people.1.0.0-docBob HaugenBob Haugenhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/702Check DFC:ProductBatch status2024-02-10T16:50:36ZLynn FosterCheck DFC:ProductBatch statusData Food Consortium has been doing a lot of updating on their model lately. This is a reminder to see if ProductBatch (which we use for EconomicResource.lot range) has been updated. Also, consider making our own lot/batch.Data Food Consortium has been doing a lot of updating on their model lately. This is a reminder to see if ProductBatch (which we use for EconomicResource.lot range) has been updated. Also, consider making our own lot/batch.1.0.0https://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/718Consider EconomicEvent.realizationOf to have a reciprocal2024-02-10T16:50:36ZLynn FosterConsider EconomicEvent.realizationOf to have a reciprocal... like Commitments etc. now have.... like Commitments etc. now have.1.0.0Lynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/642Use of owl:unionOf2024-02-07T20:01:44ZLynn FosterUse of owl:unionOfThis seems to not be working in our LODE spec generator (needs more exacting investigation, but that's my suspicion of missing properties of classes). And I saw a reference in some issue in LODE to the "awkward" use of owl:unionOf. So ...This seems to not be working in our LODE spec generator (needs more exacting investigation, but that's my suspicion of missing properties of classes). And I saw a reference in some issue in LODE to the "awkward" use of owl:unionOf. So this issue is to remember to investigate unionOf more thoroughly to see if it is the best way to specify a property that is the domain of more than one class, but shouldn't create any inferences about that set of classes in relation to each other. And if it seems to be the best way, to discuss it with LODE. If not, to fix it.1.0.0https://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/715Upgrade query naming section2024-01-29T15:24:33ZLynn FosterUpgrade query naming sectionand make sure it works with the new inverses and other changesand make sure it works with the new inverses and other changes1.0.0-docLynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/717Fix the context.jsonld file2024-01-29T15:00:17ZLynn FosterFix the context.jsonld fileNeeds to be upgraded with newer changes, and match the w3id. Also, look for other things that need to be upgraded but have been forgotten.
This is sort of part of #713 since it was created for that. But people also do use the context ...Needs to be upgraded with newer changes, and match the w3id. Also, look for other things that need to be upgraded but have been forgotten.
This is sort of part of #713 since it was created for that. But people also do use the context as documentation, apparently.1.0.0Lynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/655Extend classifications so they can be any identifier, not just uri's2024-01-23T16:51:28ZLynn FosterExtend classifications so they can be any identifier, not just uri'sAlready done in Bonfire.Already done in Bonfire.1.0.0Lynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/504Proposal publishing category2024-01-18T19:43:28ZLynn FosterProposal publishing categoryI"m thinking about adding a proposal category kind of thing to the proposal PR https://github.com/valueflows/valueflows/pull/503, but want to keep the PR as simple as possible to try to get something out there. So creating an issue to d...I"m thinking about adding a proposal category kind of thing to the proposal PR https://github.com/valueflows/valueflows/pull/503, but want to keep the PR as simple as possible to try to get something out there. So creating an issue to discuss.
I was earlier thinking we would probably need something besides Proposal for multilateral exchange agreements, but maybe not. Already every intent software I know expects an "offer/want" flag. Although that can be derived from our provider/receiver data, it is a bit messy.
So, how about a category code to help publishers figure out what to publish where, in their particular app?
Like:
* offer
* request
* multilateral exchange
* ??Release .3https://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/663Planning layer resources2024-01-18T19:35:01ZLynn FosterPlanning layer resourcesThis is for discussion around an issue we have been discussing in the "demo app" dev group, where we are working on creating a plan without a recipe.
When ResourceSpecifications are very specific (i.e. all you need to identify what a ...This is for discussion around an issue we have been discussing in the "demo app" dev group, where we are working on creating a plan without a recipe.
When ResourceSpecifications are very specific (i.e. all you need to identify what a resource is), there is not a problem. So for most material manufacturing, where resource specifications are considered "substitutable", this is fine. (That means one resource with this specification can be substituted for another with this specification.)
But in creation of digital resources, art, and other non-substitutable resources, where each is one of a kind, there can be a problem. Often for these resources, a specific ResourceSpecification for each EconomicResource is not appropriate, and just creates clutter. In addition, often recipes will be created at a more general level, and apply to all the one-of-a-kind resources.
So, we have wanted to create more general ResourceSpecifications, such as "XYZ Monthly Event" or "Blog Post". Then for the processes to hold together in a value flow, more is needed. It is a start that a series of connected processes are in the scope of one Agent, or part of one Plan. But we also need something "resourcey".
Ideas so far:
* Put a text field in an output Commitment that can give a resource name and referenced in an input Commitment that uses or consumes or cites what was produced or modified in the output.
* This could be pre-populated with concatenated existing data as a starting point.
* Create a new planned resource entity that mirrors RecipeResource and EconomicResource on the knowledge and observation layers respectively.
* Use EconomicResource as a bridge between planning and observation, like Process, allowing initial population of the resource during planning. (It would have to know not to show up in inventory.)1.0.0Lynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/706Do we want to add `previousEvent` to the vocabulary?2024-01-18T19:19:38ZLynn FosterDo we want to add `previousEvent` to the vocabulary?Spins off from this track/trace issue #688 . We defined `previousEvent` in the logic, but didn't put it into the ttl file. Should we? Or is this something not quite official vocabulary?Spins off from this track/trace issue #688 . We defined `previousEvent` in the logic, but didn't put it into the ttl file. Should we? Or is this something not quite official vocabulary?Lynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/711Fix paired with action definition2024-01-03T16:12:15ZLynn FosterFix paired with action definitionPaired With should only be designated when the paired flows go in and out of the same process.Paired With should only be designated when the paired flows go in and out of the same process.Lynn FosterLynn Fosterhttps://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/685Did we shoot our collective foot by moving this repo from github to here?2024-01-03T15:34:53ZBob HaugenDid we shoot our collective foot by moving this repo from github to here?- Why we did it:
- Github follows US laws and cut off some of our contributors.
- Github was also acquired by Microsoft which has a troubled history with open source projects.
- Foot-shoot problems:
- People need to ask us to...- Why we did it:
- Github follows US laws and cut off some of our contributors.
- Github was also acquired by Microsoft which has a troubled history with open source projects.
- Foot-shoot problems:
- People need to ask us to create login credentials here.
- Our friendly hosts will help on request but they don't want to leave registration open because of spam (which will happen if it gets half a chance).
- How can we improve the situation? Looking for suggestions.https://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/645EconomicEvent: agreedIn vs realizationOf2023-12-21T00:07:39ZAndrewEconomicEvent: agreedIn vs realizationOfThese two fields both seem to reference agreements, but I'm not sure in what case I'd use one or the other. Can I get some clarification on these?
Thanks!These two fields both seem to reference agreements, but I'm not sure in what case I'd use one or the other. Can I get some clarification on these?
Thanks!https://lab.allmende.io/valueflows/valueflows/-/issues/670Proposed delivery options2023-12-20T22:32:03ZLynn FosterProposed delivery optionsThis question was raised by DFC, who is investigating using VF.
>We didn't find a way to represent the shipping options with different price and also, the free shipping possibility over a certain quantity.
>Also, there are also differe...This question was raised by DFC, who is investigating using VF.
>We didn't find a way to represent the shipping options with different price and also, the free shipping possibility over a certain quantity.
>Also, there are also different ways of paiements proposed by the providers that have to be described for each order/sell (cash, credit card, etc.).
>A provider has to propose the different ways of shipping/paiements at first and an agreement as to be a representation of the sell itself, the shipping option chose and the paiement option chose.
DFC current model:
![dfc-sale-delivery](/uploads/98063f7b13915891ecf0b05b59a5051d/dfc-sale-delivery.png)
Note: http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/goodrelations-UML.png (I think this was also added to schema.org) has some delivery-specific stuff in their model.1.0.0Lynn FosterLynn Foster