Data Flow and Data Import

The GCB markets the project to its members and other MICE stakeholders. The GCB's contacts are usually municipal convention bureaus, which act as multipliers. In addition to municipal convention bureaus and their local partners, cross-state providers and stakeholders, including hotel chains and industry associations, are also involved in the Open Data project as GCB project partners. For these cross-state providers in particular, the data flow usually goes directly into the existing GCB subgraph.

At the federal state level, some of the state tourism organisations take on the task of centrally recording and transferring MICE data to the DZT Knowledge Graph for their federal state. This requires that the MICE data be transferred from the local or regional data hubs to the respective state hub or recorded directly there. Further information on this is available from the respective state tourism organisation.

Depending on the use case, different data flows and variants of data import are possible.

The data can flow from the data provider to the individual subgraphs of the state tourism organisations – often via industry-specific central database systems, which are frequently used by cities, regions and state tourism organisations. In addition, data can also flow directly from the service provider into the MICE subgraph of the GCB. The subgraphs of the national tourism organisations and the MICE subgraph of the GCB are merged in the GNTB's Open Data Knowledge Graph.

Data is usually exchanged via interfaces using pull or push methods. When importing data directly into the MICE subgraph, the data can be entered manually via a data mask in individual cases. Another option is to import data via XLS, XML, CSV or JSON files.