229
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 150:
Line 150: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Open Food Facts Days 2024/rebuilding open food facts from the ground up workshop (view source)
Revision as of 11:58, 21 September 2024
, 21 September→English (automatic translation)
== English (automatic translation) ==
== English (automatic translation) ==
Participants: Yassine, Antoine, Gustave, Anthony and Heyman
=== Discussion ===
==== On data and their organizations ====
OFF is not only on food today.
Think about that from the start.
BDD currently Food oriented.
GS1 -GDSN data -> But not really good format
GS1 Voc -> Schema.org extension to map all the fields of the GDSN -400 properties
Openbatra - Let's give the same format to small producers (GSDN + Extension Schema.org)
OpenFoodFacts -> Mongodb, a lower schema, it is a choice that could be kept.
Because we do not know the projects that will be added, therefore be evolving.
At LLM time, structured data (whatever the data), is what is important.
Offer to producers a data restory: PDF, photo sheet, GS1 -> data and deduce the structured data
Today unique identifier = gtin
To come, digital passport of the product: from its beginning of life to sorting waste. With a central register.
It is surely the GS1 format that will impose itself.
Online GS1 Forum this week, note: they are fully in AI (answer user questions).
Note: Return of experience on the standardization of carpooling,
which was difficult to bear for existing actors,
But interoperability at the end wins.
==== Higher level ====
What is the objective of Open Food Facts:
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Initially the goal is data transparency
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Today -> Reliability is a little more important
<nowiki>*</nowiki> But the ultimate goal: to respond to a problem, to a decision -making
This product is good or not good - depending on my context.
But it would also be important to have reliability clues (crossing information for example).
Nutriscore: is not intra-category
In England - an intra category score -
The Eren thought that to change the habits, non-intra-category is best.
On the environment it is very important not to do intra-category, because the orders of magnitude are even greater.
Off is at the crossroads of lots of data and use sources.
Off is already on a lot of levels, just wanting to have the data on lots of products from the world,
Making indicators is yet another level, all the level access to the public and ease of contribution is also important.
Look at the Open Street Map side which also has very heterogeneous data: a store opening time, beer prices, elevation.
They let the contributors create their data and applications. For example on climbing we have lots of super precise data.
Can be separated:
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Data collection and quality
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Creation of algos etc.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Creation of new use cases
Question to ask yourself am I b2c or rather an ecosystem with start-ups, producers, the big public.
Here off was rather large public: to put reliable info to the big public for its decisions (especially purchases)
In areas where the issues are really important. The quality of data is higher here compared to Open Street Map.
The very centralized model of Open Food Facts may find it difficult to go to scale.
The Crowdsourcing + Direct data aspect will remain.
If you are flexible on the data it is the one who re-uses who must filter.
You need a standard all the same for structure the data.
Open Food Facts Technical Stack is today a brake on the contribution.
Reliability: On Open Street Map we have to indicate in which context we had the data.
(on Open Food Facts it is still in boxes to better ask this information)
Indicator also also depends on the context: e.g. not very important for a diabetic.
Contextuality is very important.
Open Food Facts is a brick for decision -making aid, not necessarily its role.
As a re-user it gives me access to a large number of data.
And the concept of quality depends on the context too and what we are looking for.
Are we a nodal point or a final user solution.
Filling the three is too difficult.
At the same time today the mobile app helps to secure the contribution and impact of Open Food Facts.
Central Food Data in the USA (public). Updated every month, with GS1.
Theyda is also quite important.
Can we have public initiatives.
The verticality of the process is an interesting issue. But also allow external actors to plug in at the level of their choice.
Opening: can we have more political things in Open Food Facts? Match for example the declarations correspond (verification).
Should we integrate this kind of information?
Current Off Policy: the most important fact base
Example also, the distribution of value.
=== Conclusion ===
Open Food Facts should not manage all incoming (acquisition) and outgoing (applications) flows
At least one vertical for project survival (capturing data) and also facilitating the re-user job.
(ex today a problem is that the OpenStreetMap.org site does not reveal the whole project at all)
Important to keep the two cannals Acquisition: Producers, Crowd-Sourcing.
Really base yourself on the GTIN (and its developments) and the GS1 compatibility to prepare the future.
The Open Food Facts brand must be synonymous with information fiablite,
To also bring to more large public contributors.
Also have this side against power / independence, research and confidence helps.
Continue the componentization of the project, to promote re-use at different levels.