Advertisement

Defining a Master Data Management Approach for Increasing Open Data Understandability

  • Susana Cadena-VelaEmail author
  • Jose-Norberto MazónEmail author
  • Andrés Fuster-GuillóEmail author
Conference paper
  • 16 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11878)

Abstract

Reusing open data is an opportunity for eSociety to create value through the development of novel data-intensive IT services and products. However, reusing open data is hampered by lack of data understandability. Actually, accessing open data requires additional information (i.e., metadata) that describes its content in order to make it understandable: if open data is misinterpreted ambiguities and misunderstandings will discourage eSociety for reusing it. In addition, services and products created by using incomprehensible open data may not generate enough confidence in potential users, thus becoming unsuccessful. Unfortunately, in order to improve the comprehensibility of the data, current proposals focus on creating metadata when open data is being published, thus overlooking metadata coming from data sources. In order to overcome this gap, our research proposes a framework to consider data sources metadata within a Master Data Management approach in order to improve understandability of the corresponding (shortly published) open data.

Keywords

Open data Understandability Data quality Master data management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been partially supported by the Publi@City project (TIN2016-78103-C2-2-R) from Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.

References

  1. 1.
    Reis, J.R., Viterbo, J., Bernardini, F.: A rationale for data governance as an approach to tackle recurrent drawbacks in open data portals. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age, pp. 73:1–73:9 (2018)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zuiderwijk, A., Helbig, N., Gil-García, J.R., Janssen, M.: Special issue on innovation through open data: a review of the state-of-the-art and an emerging research agenda: guest editors’ introduction. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 9(2), 1–8 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benitez, F., Comber, A., Huerta, J.: Improve the reusability of open How much data is generated every minute? (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ISO: International Standard Iso ISO/IEC 25024, 2015, vol. 2015 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kubler, S., Robert, J., Le Traon, Y., Umbrich, J., Neumaier, S.: Open data portal quality comparison using AHP. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government Research, pp. 397–407 (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heinrich, B., Klier, M., Schiller, A., Wagner, G.: Assessing data quality – a probability-based metric for semantic consistency. Decis. Support Syst. 110, 95–106 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Umbrich, J., Neumaier, S., Polleres, A.: Quality assessment and evolution of open data portals. In: Proceedings of 2015 International Conference Future Internet Things Cloud, FiCloud 2015, 2015 International Conference Open Big Data, OBD 2015, pp. 404–411 (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sadiq, S., Indulska, M.: Open data: quality over quantity. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 37(3), 150–154 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kubler, S., Robert, J., Neumaier, S., Umbrich, J., Le Traon, Y.: Comparison of metadata quality in open data portals using the analytic hierarchy process. Gov. Inf. Q. 35(1), 13–29 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Prieto, A.E., Mazon, J.-N., Lozano-Tello, A.: Framework for prioritization of open data publication: an application to smart cities. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Top. Comput. 6750(c), 1 (2019)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kassen, M.: A promising phenomenon of open data: a case study of the Chicago open data project. Gov. Inf. Q. 30(4), 508–513 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Attard, J., Orlandi, F., Scerri, S., Auer, S.: A systematic review of open government data initiatives. Gov. Inf. Q. 32(4), 399–418 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Missier, P., Belhajjame, K., Cheney, J.: The W3C PROV family of specifications for modelling provenance metadata. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, pp. 773–776 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Devarakonda, R., Palanisamy, G., Green, J.M., Wilson, B.E.: Data sharing and retrieval using OAI-PMH. Earth Sci. Informatics 4(1), 1–5 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Avison, D.E., Davison, R.M., Malaurent, J.: Information systems action research: debunking myths and overcoming barriers. Inf. Manag. 55(2), 177–187 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Central University of EcuadorQuitoEcuador
  2. 2.University of AlicanteAlicanteSpain

Personalised recommendations