W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > August 2010

Re: Little Maps of the US

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 12:39:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <54545.26977.qm@web112612.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Cc: W3C Egov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Mike,

I think you are looking for a civilian version of this: http://www.usno.navy.mil/  Much of the data has been available for years if you knew where to look, in places you were allowed to look.   PURL's and Tiny URL's can handle the domain/registry/profile redirects you require, with existing IETF and IANA/ICANN specifications. data.gov and data.gov.uk solve certain interoperability issues, very well, IMO.  Transparency is a bit of a red herring if personalizations added for commercial purposes are considered innovations *cough* social networking *cough*.

--Gannon

--- On Sat, 8/28/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US
To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Cc: "Submit to W3C Egov IG" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Date: Saturday, August 28, 2010, 11:38 AM

My suggestion would be to have a .NWS and a .NOAA top level domain of datasets through which geospatial data could be represented and bound with all websites, which would contain localized geospatial information of their own (eg:  CompanyLocales, Location, etc,).   A .FEMA datset could then communicate with the .NWS and .NOAA datasets and generate a proactive list of resources identified by companies with a presence on the web, a type of free-market infrastructure toward problem-solving among weather-related events. Tie in a .DOE TLD for Dept. of Energy and there's the century's energy solution in a nutshell (or dataset :)
 Michael A. Norton 

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 12:51:23 PM
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US


If it was done consistently, as below, then no.

Two problems here, first, browsers cache so it's best to use links to the data set rather than the data set itself.  Second, you want to bind the distribution to the dataset as firmly as possible to avoid having people strip off the "header" (the distribution's property set).

What I'm working toward is a list of "Little Map" points with a link for each point to:
Weather (working on this now)
Sunshine (I have a spreadsheet and javascript from NOAA)
Ports (incl. Airports) - UN/LOCODE (The last I counted, DHS has 8 different systems, none of which tie into web mapping) 
Suggestions ???

--- On Fri, 8/27/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US
To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Friday, August 27, 2010, 2:16 PM


Is this the kind of mashup you frown upon with regard to NWS data?
 

Michael A. Norton
 








From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Sent: Fri, August 27, 2010 12:14:42 PM
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US





Yes.

As I understand it, (for the Little Maps example) ...

One Distribution has one Dataset, one distribution date and one dataset date

or alternatively

One Distribution has one Dataset (with a date column), one distribution date and one dataset date range 

--- On Fri, 8/27/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:


From: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US
To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org
Date: Friday, August 27, 2010, 1:25 PM







Still a bit foggy here.   A query would reference the dcat:distribution element for the timestamp but an inference of the dataset would follow along with it, yes?  And the dcat:distribution timestamp would reference when the dataset was distributed rather then when the actual event (eg: raining, snowing) occurred?
 

Michael A. Norton
 








From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org
Sent: Thu, August 26, 2010 8:53:57 PM
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US

This relates to (sort of):
ISSUE-43 (abstract_dataset): attach specific properties to dcat:Distribution and not to dcat:Dataset [dcat]

although that is a more general case.

Two Mash-Ups of weather on geography, one for today and one for yesterday would be two dcat:Distribution or manifestations.  The common properties between the distributions would only be the geo properties which are fixed in time.  You could still figure out (where it rained|snowed|etc.)[Dataset] and
 (when)[Distribution date property].  This is the normal thing you do when designing a Data Base, but it's not always so obvious what is best.  If you wanted to get a list of noon day temperatures at a place for a year, another design (without the required 365 dcat:Distribution(s)) might be better.

There are always going to be query optimizations, but putting the meta properties in one place (attached to Distribution) is a best practice, I think.  Make sense ?  

--- On Thu, 8/26/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US
To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org
Date: Thursday, August 26, 2010, 8:49 PM

Gannon: "IMHO, the RDFa meta data should not include the 'Weather' parameters
 themselves."
 Why not?
Michael A. Norton 

From: Gannon Dick
<gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
To: Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org
Sent: Thu, August 26, 2010 1:11:50 PM
Subject: Re: Little Maps of the US


--- On Wed, 8/25/10, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is this anywhere near the kind of data NWS utilizes in mapping meteorological data?

Yes, as a matter of fact ...

But let me back up just a little: The "Little Maps" are a grid point subset.  The meta data is assumed constant, and it changes so slowly that that assumption is valid.  Weather observations and Forecasts are a time dependent Mash-Up. This topic is a huge subject of controversy at the moment, because a person's location is a similar type of Mash-Up. This debate runs counter
 to the
 Scientific Method since there is no reason to believe that observations are reproducible and computable with sound semantic principles.  This sort of thinking will get us both burned at the stake in Advertising Departments, Mr. Norton :o)  

The NWS has a beta
test of XML available, as well as some XSL transforms (which I have not had a good look at).  It would not be too difficult to add a Weather link to the "Little Map".  IMHO, the RDFa meta data should not include the "Weather" parameters themselves.

<http://www.weather.gov/alerts-beta/>


-- Gannon





      


      






      
Received on Saturday, 28 August 2010 19:39:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 28 August 2010 19:40:00 GMT