JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for QUAL-SOFTWARE Archives


QUAL-SOFTWARE Archives

QUAL-SOFTWARE Archives


QUAL-SOFTWARE@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

QUAL-SOFTWARE Home

QUAL-SOFTWARE Home

QUAL-SOFTWARE  June 2006

QUAL-SOFTWARE June 2006

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

data exchange formats

From:

"Corti, Louise" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

qual-software <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 15 Jun 2006 01:12:32 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (152 lines)

Hello all,
 
We have been wotking on a data exchange standard for qualitative data for sometime.  Utilising an XMl model, we are working closely with the TEI leaders and team in Australia to look at a common data exchange for qual data, which might be better expressed in RDF.  Stand-off annnotation methods can easily cope with overlapping XML. 
 
The format is in the early stages of development and we would like to approach all the software producers to consider discussing their needs regarding import and export. We have alreday been speaking for 3 of the major softwares. 
 
Im my opinion as data archivist, we are in dire need of a non-proprieary exchange format, and much like the problem we had prior to the 80s with compatibility between the statistical softwares, we did end up agreeing to a portable format -  SPSS.por.  While this is not a true open data exchange format it does enable import and export into and out of many of the leading packages.  We need a CAQDAS.por.  
 
I am currently writing a bid that aims to enable dedicated staff to work on this developemnt, and am currently building in testers and evaluators.  Please let me know if you are interested.  A brief background to development work can be found at http://www.esds.ac.uk/qualidata/online/about/background.asp (updated text to go live next week!)

I think a more technical dicssuion may not be of great interest to this list and I would like to propose a dedicated group than can help look at the issue in more detail..  
 
Best 
Louise
 
Louise Corti
Assocaiet Directro an Head SESD Qualidata
Uk DAta ARchive
University of Essex
Colchester
0044 1206 872145
 
 
 
________________________________

From: qual-software on behalf of Normand Peladeau
Sent: Wed 14/06/2006 19:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: To be or not to be... XML compatible.



At 6/13/2006 08:00 AM, Thomas Muhr wrote:
>One important aspect regarding long termed
>longitudinal studies is "standards". There are
>several threats associated with using tools over
>a longer period of time. One is, that the
>original tool is simply not available anymore
>for what reasons ever (which will never happen
>to us, of course!-). Or you might wish to
>analyze your data with different tools at some
>stage of research. For both circumstances an
>approved standard for the project data might
>become important. ATLAS.ti supports such standards.

Thomas,

Well! QDA Miner v2.0 also, and until Atlas-ti 6.0
is released next year, I would say that QDA Miner
is the only major QDA software that can be used
to export tagged documents to XML. But the point
I would like to make is something completely
different. While I agree that supporting XML is
something useful, I would like to express some
reservations about the true value of XML. I would
not say that XML is a standard, it is more a
structured language in which standards could be
developed and are being developed. Actually,
there are currently hundreds of standards
developed in XML for various purposes, such as
for the storage of taxonomies, thesaurus,
linguistic coding, as well as for numerous
industries. The first XML standard we chose to
support in QDA Miner was Triple-S, an XML
standard to exchange survey data. When we started
to look at standards for hierarchical taxonomies,
we found 3 XML standards, none of those was widely used.

This leads me to identify a few problems with
XML. First, importing data in XML can be quite
problematic since, unless we follow more specific
standards when choosing the name of elements,
mapping the structure of an existing XML file to
an application will be very difficult.  On can
still use some XML editors but they are not the
kind of tools that can be learned quickly. While
for HTML, we know pretty much which application
has to be supported (i.e. the browsers) there is
no such tools in XML (except maybe the syntax
checking tools that can only be used to make sure
you followed the XML language conventions).

Another major problem with XML when applied to
QDA is that it currently does not provide
conventions for overlapping markups, something
that is quite common in QDA.  XML is a highly
structured version of SGML where elements must be
structured hiearchically (they say "well-formed")
so that tag contents should never overlap. But
sometimes you need them to overlap and there has
been many proposals for solving this issue (the
Text Encoding Initiative and the OSIS group
proposed the use of two different kinds of
milestones, and some suggested using other
existing SGML or XML features, or adding new
ones).  I don't know which strategy Atlas-ti 6
will use for exporting tags in documents, but we
decided to use a method somewhat similar to the
one propose by the OSIS group.  Although we
follow the XML rules, by doing this, most XML
editing tool available today won't be able to
correctly interpret the significance of those
special "milestones".  If you choose another
solution, then people may never be able to
exchange coded documents between QDA Miner,
Atlas-ti and maybe even between any other
software supporting XML.  If you choose a similar
solution than the one we chosen, then the only
software that will be able to use those markups
produced by Atlas-ti will be our software (and vice versa).

This brings me to a last problem with XML. Since
overlapping codes are not allowed or not easily
implemented in XML, then any text formatting has
to be dropped from the document. You cannot use
<b> </b> to put things in bold or <i> </i> to
make this text italic. You may be able to do
this, but you would have to make sure those codes
never ovelaps. HTML can do this, simple because
it breaks the "well-formeness" rule of XML. (This
is also the reason why XHTML may also be
problematic since they are proposing it to
eliminate overlapping codes in HTML 4).

I would say that in order for XML to be really
useful for qualitative researchers, then we would
have to sit, you and me, and all those interested
in this idea of allowing easy exchange of data
between QDA tools, transcription tools, etc, and
develop our own standards for the QDA community.
We may also decide which other standards should
ideally be supported. Should we follow the Text
Coding Initiative group (and wait for them to
solve the markup overlap problem) or the OSIS
group (the Bible Technolgies Group) which has
also proposed some solutions for this? Should we
develop our own standards and our own solution
and make sure those standards fulfill our need?

Until we have our own standards, I would say that
the easiest way to exchange tagged documents
would be to use either plain text (or unicode
text), HTML, and maybe even RTF.  XML has the
potential of contributing to the development of
standards for the QDA community, but we are just not there yet.

Best regards,

Normand Péladeau
Provalis Research

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager