Copyright © 2024
This document describes the Core Criterion and Core Evidence Vocabulary (CCCEV). Similarly to all the Core Vocabularies, CCCEV is "a context-neutral data model that captures the fundamental characteristics of an entity". A Core Vocabulary specifies a semantic data model covering a set of use cases across domains. The specification consists of terms with a minimal set of constraints (recommended codelists, usage guidelines, etc.).
The Core Criterion and Core Evidence Vocabulary is designed to support the exchange of information between organisations or persons (more generally Agents) defining Requirements and organisations or persons responding to these Requirements by means of structured or unstructured Evidences.
CCCEV contains two basic and complementary core concepts:
Although CCCEV shapes a general framework around these core concepts, implementers have to make decisions on how the framework is actually used by further elaborating the Core Vocabulary to make it applicable in their specific context.
This Core Vocabulary has the status SEMIC Recommendation published at 2024-05-06.
Information about the process and the decisions involved in the creation of this specification are consultable at the Changelog.
Copyright © 2024 European Union. All material in this repository is published under the license CC-BY 4.0, unless explicitly otherwise mentioned.
A Core Vocabulary (CV) is a basic, reusable and extensible data specification that captures the fundamental characteristics of an entity in a context-neutral fashion. Its main objective is to provide terms to be reused in the broadest possible context. More information can be found on the SEMIC Style Guide.
This specification uses the following prefixes to shorten the URIs for readibility.Prefix | Namespace IRI |
---|---|
cv | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/ |
dct | http://purl.org/dc/terms/ |
foaf | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ |
locn | http://www.w3.org/ns/locn# |
rdf | http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# |
rdfs | http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# |
skos | http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core# |
time | http://www.w3.org/2006/time# |
xsd | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema# |
This document describes the usage of the following main entities for a correct usage of the Core Vocabulary:
|
Constraint |
Criterion |
Evidence |
Evidence Type |
Evidence Type List |
Information Concept |
Information Requirement |
Reference Framework |
Requirement |
The main entities are supported by:
|
Agent |
Location |
Period of Time |
Supported Value |
And supported by these datatypes:
| Code | Decimal | Duration | Instant | Literal | String |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
constrains | Information Concept | 0..* | Information Concept about which a Constraint expresses a limitation. | Information Concepts are tools to make Requirements more machine processable: they allow to provide more detail about a Requirement. This way, Constraints can be made very precise, namely the limit that must be achieved, is a limit on the value for the associated Information Concept. For example, the Information Concept would be the age of a person and the Constraint would be the required age in the context of a specific evaluation. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
bias | Decimal | 0..* | Parameter used to adjust the evaluation of the Criterion. | The bias parameter tries to correct a systematic error. For example in procurement, a home bias corresponds to the "presence of local preferences distorting international specialisation and resource allocation". When quantified, this systematic error can be removed. | ||
weight | Decimal | 0..* | Relative importance of the Criterion. | The weight must be between 0 and 1. Usually, all Criteria can be integrated within a weighted sum equal to 1. | ||
weighting consideration description | String | 0..* | Explanation of how the weighting of a Criterion is to be used. | This description gives the view of the creator of the Criterion weights on how to interpret and use them during the evaluation process. | ||
weighting type | Code | 0..* | Indication of how the weight should be interpreted in a complex evaluation expression, e.g. as a percentage in an evaluation expression. | An existing codelist which can be used is OP's Number weigth controlled vocabulary |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
confidentiality level type | Code | 0..* | Security classification assigned to an Evidence e.g. classified, sensitive, public. | Classifications should be defined by an organisation/country as an outcome of a security assessment. | ||
is about | Agent | 0..* | Agent that is the subject in the provided Evidence. | |||
is conformant to | Evidence Type | 0..* | Evidence Type that specifies characteristics of the Evidence. | Examples of characteristics could be the layout or the configuration of the Evidence. | ||
is created by | Agent | 0..* | Agent that produces the Evidence. | The production of evidence could involve the generation of a document or the extraction of data from a database. | ||
is issued by | Agent | 0..* | Agent legally responsible for the Evidence, e.g. a legal authority. | This property captures cases such as when a legal authority is responsible for the regulation about an Evidence (e.g. a ministry). | ||
is provided by | Agent | 0..* | Agent that transmits the Evidence. | Agents transmitting Evidence are usually the Agents issuing the Evidence or service providers acting on behalf of the issuing Agents such as software developer companies. The Evidence provisioning might pass through a chain of providers. Implementers have to define which providers are to ba shared or which not. | ||
supports concept | Information Concept | 0..* | Information Concept providing facts found/inferred from the Evidence. | Examples of Information Concepts are values found explictly in the evidence such as a birth date or information derived from the Evidence such as "I am older that 18 years". | ||
supports requirement | Requirement | 0..* | Requirement for which the Evidence provides proof. | |||
supports value | Supported Value | 0..* | Supported Value that the Evidence contains. | |||
validity period | Period of Time | 0..* | Period of Time during which the Evidence holds true or has force. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
evidence type classification | Code | 0..* | Category to which the Evidence Type belongs. | The categories agreed are left open but could for example specify the layout and content expected for an Evidence. | ||
identifier | Literal | 0..* | Unambiguous reference to the Evidence Type. | |||
is specified in | Evidence Type List | 0..* | Evidence Type List in which the Evidence Type is included. | |||
issuing place | Location | 0..* | Refers to the Location where an Evidence Type is issued. | E.g. Belgian ID cards are issued in Belgium. | ||
validity period constraint | Period of Time | 0..* | Temporal condition on the validity period of the Evidence Type. | E.g. A Belgian birth evidence is valid for X months after emission. To express constraints on the validity period that must hold when assessing the evidence (e.g. the certificate of good conduct cannot be issued more than 3 months ago), we refer to the Constraint class. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
description | String | 0..* | Short explanation supporting the understanding of the Evidence Type List. | The explanation can include information about the nature, attributes, uses or any other additional information about the Evidence Type List. | ||
identifier | Literal | 0..* | Unambiguous reference to the Evidence Type List. | |||
name | String | 0..* | Name of the Evidence Type List. | |||
specifies evidence type | Evidence Type | 0..* | Evidence Type included in this Evidence Type List. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
description | String | 0..* | Short explanation supporting the understanding of the Information Concept. | The explanation can include information about the nature, attributes, uses or any other additional information about the Information Concept. | ||
expression of expected value | Literal | 0..* | Formulation in a formal language of the expected value(s) for the Information Concept which is aligned with the concepts from the Requirements defined and must be respected by the supplied Supported Values . | The property encapsulates all kind of expectations on the required and provided values one could have. This may range from representational expectations such as the type (e.g. the value is expected to be a xsd:decimal) to expectations that reduce the allowed value range. Commonly this is done using min or max bounderary expressions (e.g. the maximum value is 1 Million Euro). Other usage could be to harmonise the supplied values (e.g. rounding, turning to percentages) to facilitate further processing. Implementers are free to use their own approach for defining the expected values in more details. For instance, this can be by defining their own datatypes extending or encapsulating common xsd datatypes. But also by using more complex languages such as XPath, Object Constraint Language (OCL), JavaScript and Rule Interchange Format (RIF). Because of this freedom, implementers are recommended to well-document their usage of this property (and related information). | ||
identifier | Literal | 0..* | Unambiguous reference to the Information Concept. | |||
name | String | 0..* | Name of the Information Concept. | |||
type | Code | 0..* | Category to which the Information Concept belongs. | In addition to the expression of the expected value, the type classification can be used to express the kind of value the information concept is processing. This can be primitive tupes such as a date or a string, but also more business domain terminology such as age or number of employees. It is recommended to well-document the usage of the property. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
identifier | Literal | 0..* | An unambiguous reference to a Reference Framework. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
description | String | 0..* | A short explanation supporting the understanding of the Requirement. | The explanation can include information about the nature, attributes, uses or any other additional information about the Requirement. | ||
has concept | Information Concept | 0..* | Information Concept for which a value is expected by the Requirement. | Information Concepts defined for specific Requirements also represent the basis for specifying the Supported Value an Evidence should provide. | ||
has evidence type list | Evidence Type List | 0..* | Evidence Type List that specifies the Evidence Types that are needed to meet the Requirement. | One or several Lists of Evidence Types can support a Requirement. At least one of them must be satisfied by the response to the Requirement. | ||
has qualified relation | Requirement | 0..* | Described and/or categorised relation to another Requirement. | This property leaves the possiblity to define a qualified relation from Requirement to Information Requirement or Constraint as well as a qualified relation from Requirement to Requirement. A use case would be to specialize an EU requirement in Member States' specific requirements. | ||
has requirement | Requirement | 0..* | A more specific Requirement that is part of the Requirement. | |||
has supporting evidence | Evidence | 0..* | Evidence that supplies information, proof or support for the Requirement. | |||
identifier | Literal | 0..* | Unambiguous reference to a Requirement. | |||
is derived from | Reference Framework | 0..* | Reference Framework on which the Requirement is based, such as a law or regulation. | Note that a Requirement can have several Reference Frameworks from which it is derived. | ||
is issued by | Agent | 0..* | Agent that has published the Requirement. | |||
is requirement of | Requirement | 0..* | A reference between a sub-Requirement and its parent Requirement. | The relation between a parent Requirement and a sub-Requirement can be complex. Therefore, qualified relations (see hasQualifiedRelation) can be used to represent this relationship on its own and qualify it with additional information such as a date, a place. This is left to implementers. In the case where the purpose is to link the two Requirements without additional information, the simple relationship as proposed here can be directly used. | ||
name | String | 0..* | Name of the Requirement. | |||
type | Code | 0..* | Category to which the Requirement belongs. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
duration | Duration | 0..* | Extent of the Period of Time. | Amount of time between start time and end time. | ||
endtime | Instant | 0..* | Time instant at which the Period was terminated. | For example, the property ends the duration during which an Evidence Type or an Evidence is considered valid. The duration must be equal to the time between the starttime and endtime. | ||
starttime | Instant | 0..* | Time instant at which the Period was initiated. | For example, the property starts the duration during which an Evidence Type or an Evidence is considered valid. The duration must be equal to the time between the starttime and endtime. |
Property | Range | Card | Definition | Usage | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
provides value for | Information Concept | 0..* | Information Concept for which the Supported Value provides a value. | |||
query | Literal | 0..* | Search statement that allows the value for the Information Concept to be retrieved from the Evidence data. | The query must be executed on the business data provided by the supporting Evidence. In order to be able to evaluate the query on the provided data, the format of the provided data must be aligned with the query expression. For instance if the provided data is XML, a query in XPath could be expected. This alignment is part of the implementation agreements that implementors must make. | ||
value | Literal | 0..* | Value for the Information Concept that the Evidence supports. |
The above example is illustrated in the following documentation.
Class | Class IRI | Property Type | Property | Property IRI |
---|---|---|---|---|
Agent | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent |
|||
Constraint | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Constraint |
constrains | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/constrains |
|
Criterion | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Criterion |
bias | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/bias |
|
Criterion | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Criterion |
weight | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/weight |
|
Criterion | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Criterion |
weighting consideration description | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/weightingConsiderationDescription |
|
Criterion | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Criterion |
weighting type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/weightingType |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
confidentiality level type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/confidentialityLevelType |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
is about | http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
is conformant to | http://purl.org/dc/terms/conformsTo |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
is created by | http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
is issued by | http://purl.org/dc/terms/publisher |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
is provided by | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/isProvidedBy |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
supports concept | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/supportsConcept |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
supports requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/supportsRequirement |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
supports value | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/supportsValue |
|
Evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Evidence |
validity period | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/validityPeriod |
|
Evidence Type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceType |
evidence type classification | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/evidenceTypeClassification |
|
Evidence Type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceType |
identifier | http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier |
|
Evidence Type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceType |
is specified in | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/isSpecifiedIn |
|
Evidence Type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceType |
issuing place | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/issuingPlace |
|
Evidence Type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceType |
validity period constraint | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/validityPeriodConstraint |
|
Evidence Type List | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceTypeList |
description | http://purl.org/dc/terms/description |
|
Evidence Type List | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceTypeList |
identifier | http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier |
|
Evidence Type List | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceTypeList |
name | http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel |
|
Evidence Type List | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/EvidenceTypeList |
specifies evidence type | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/specifiesEvidenceType |
|
Information Concept | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/InformationConcept |
description | http://purl.org/dc/terms/description |
|
Information Concept | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/InformationConcept |
expression of expected value | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/expressionOfExpectedValue |
|
Information Concept | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/InformationConcept |
identifier | http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier |
|
Information Concept | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/InformationConcept |
name | http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel |
|
Information Concept | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/InformationConcept |
type | http://purl.org/dc/terms/type |
|
Information Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/InformationRequirement |
|||
Location | http://purl.org/dc/terms/Location |
|||
Period of Time | http://www.w3.org/2006/time#ProperInterval |
duration | http://www.w3.org/2006/time#hasXSDDuration |
|
Period of Time | http://www.w3.org/2006/time#ProperInterval |
endtime | http://www.w3.org/2006/time#hasEnd |
|
Period of Time | http://www.w3.org/2006/time#ProperInterval |
starttime | http://www.w3.org/2006/time#hasBeginning |
|
Reference Framework | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/ReferenceFramework |
identifier | http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
description | http://purl.org/dc/terms/description |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
has concept | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/hasConcept |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
has evidence type list | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/hasEvidenceTypeList |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
has qualified relation | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/hasQualifiedRelation |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
has requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/hasRequirement |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
has supporting evidence | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/hasSupportingEvidence |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
identifier | http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
is derived from | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/isDerivedFrom |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
is issued by | http://purl.org/dc/terms/publisher |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
is requirement of | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/isRequirementOf |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
name | http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel |
|
Requirement | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/Requirement |
type | http://purl.org/dc/terms/type |
|
Supported Value | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/SupportedValue |
provides value for | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/providesValueFor |
|
Supported Value | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/SupportedValue |
query | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/query |
|
Supported Value | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/SupportedValue |
value | http://data.europa.eu/m8g/value |