Bakgrund: Inom Skatteverket Har Sedan Våren 2011 Drivits Ett Arbete Med Att Se Över Och
Comments:
An international standard must take into account that register in different countries are different. There may be attributes in the standardization proposal that are redundant or require a specific conversion. We currently have no information about some of them. We can accept and manage this, but in a future Swedish standard, we will simplify these parts.
The idea of breaking out the identifier for a custom object is brilliant. It gives us the ability of keeping multiple identities on the same object, and to store metadata on identity. It is supporting not only the use of TIN-numbers but it also solves some other Swedish issues.
The concept of “CHANGE” is interesting. All case management system in Sweden keep a journal in which all changes to the data in the file is recorded .The journal keeps information about the user who made the change, what the change was, and when it was made. We believethat different attributes (who are of interest to link to “CHANGE”) can be associated to this journal notes.
Proposal for adjustment:
We are not entirely sure that we interpreted the term “LICENSE” correctly but ina use case delivered to the working group on core's vocabulary, translators is given as an example of a “LICENSE”. We understand the importance of the license concept, but think it should be associated to the “AGENT” concept instead of “LEGAL ENTITY”. Physical persons could very well be licensed without having anassociation to a legal entity.
Proposal for amendments:
Role:
In several of the usecases presented to the Working Groups the concept of “ROLE” was underpinned. The concept “ROLE” is perhaps the most crucial concepts in our model. We must know in which roles a particular person is acting in a specific context in order to know when the person concerned is to be communicated and what access rights he has in this case.
The Swedish Tax agency currently has 53 different types of addresses in their registers. This is to a large extent due to the use of socalled special addresses in different case types. These are often addresses to managers, accountants, auditor firms, representatives or other contact persons in a specific case type. We know, however, only that there is a special addressto be used and not why and whom it is addressed. If e.g. the auditor moves, we very seldom receive an update of the address. If we instead of a “dead”special address had known that this was an auditor who would be the agent in this type of cases, we would have had information of the move according to the usual update channels. The “ROLE” concept will solve a lot of problems with the maintenance of address data. (This is surely not a unique problem for the Swedish Tax agency!)
We are presently trying to give citizens more direct insight in their own cases. To facilitate this we try to give the citizens their own view on what constitutes a case. The authorities- views are limited, often for organizational or legal reasons. Thecitizens-case may cover several administrative issues, and sometimes only parts of them.Take as an example the case, "mychild’sbirth". There are many authorities involved, such as: health care, population register and the commune, but for the citizen, it is just one case. It is, however, a big difference in access rights to information, depending on whether you are the child's mother, father,authorized as a guardian or perhaps identified as being the father but refuses to fatherhood.
Contact information:
A vital part of our strategy is to let citizens them self decide about communication with the authorities. This “citizen-choice” includes what channel of communication to bee preferred, but also e.g. need for communication on minority languages, or various supports for different kinds of disabilities. Much of this lies in the future, but in Swedenwe are already introducing the possibility of choosing a secure electronic mailbox instead of paper in communication with various authorities. In the concept of “CONTACT INFORMATION”, we combine the citizen's preferences (Communication preference) with the real addresses of the respective communication channel.
Postal address:
We use different types of standards for mailing address. This sets the type that is current.
Address information:
We want to support four different communication channels-letter (paper), the physical meeting, telephone and electronic communications. This specifies the type of channel the address concerns. In addition, we provide some metadata around address e.g. this is an official address which must be used in certain contexts, or this address is only applicable under certain conditions e.g. telephone (daytime).
Telephone number and electronic address:
These objects are keeping information concerning these types of addresses.
Our suggestion:
As a result of the reasoning above we suggest the following models:
Conceptual model:
Class model:
