Item talk:Q762

1. This subsector may require further study on how to incorporate the supply of fossil fuels.

2. Although we did not have aliases or descriptors from human and machine labelling, the supply of fossil fuels might be a missing sub-concept.

3. However, it was not incorporated because it requires further study on how to classify energy supply and the connection (to avoid overlap) with the extractive and manufacturing sectors.

4. Similarly, incorporating the sub-concept of fossil fuel supply would require better understanding of its connection with "gas supply" which is one of our existing sub-concepts.

5. A potential alternative is to classify solely focusing on the sequence "production - transmission - distribution (to end users)", which follows our current definition of energy supply.

6. In this case, we could add sub-concepts in each area. For example: electricity production, gas production, bioenergy production, and coal production.

7. However, this approach might also require study to avoid overlap with the extractive and manufacturing sectors.

8. Additionally, this alternative (follow production-transmission-distribution) would require significant time, as it would necessitate removing several current sub-concepts, including "electricity supply" and its related sub-concepts and find new aliases.

Energy supply and energy market

1. In sectors, we defined energy supply as "The activities of industries involved in the production, distribution, and sale of energy, (...)".

2. As a sub-concept, the item "energy market" was created.

3. However, "energy market" might overlap with other climate finance vocabulary, finance instruments, and governance market instruments.

4. It will likely be necessary to synchronise and better connect these items, providing more meaning and disaggregating "energy market" into richer sub-concepts and aliases coming from climate finance framework.

5. This might require a deep dive into the energy market framework as it is a complex and evolving interdisciplinary area.

6. As a caveat, that richer "energy market" vocabulary was neither captured nor labelled by the machine and human in the samples given.

This sub-sector might require a further development

1. It is likely we need a deep dive into energy supply (Q762) to think in richer aliases and sub-concepts, under a more technical approach.

2. This sector is too complex (in terms of vocabulary and technicalities), and without better distinctions probably our aliases and sub-concepts will be overlapping and not capturing the main concerns of our users.

3. So far, we followed the ISIC scheme as guidance, but it might be necessary to complement this concept.