W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > July 2013

Re: Recording geolocation of the annotation (where the annotation has been created)

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 09:52:26 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtn4cs77dMx8suv6vh70En+ayvwD8chUbcf1=hPxBRPzqA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Cc: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>, public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
yes, prov:atLocation can be associated with an entity (such as an
annotation), an agent (person) or an activity ("annotating"). It can
also be used to qualify any of the expanded relations, prov:Generation
, prov:Start , prov:Invalidation , prov:End , prov:Usage.

So perhaps the question is, what is it that "have" this location? It
sounds like Paolo wants to associate it with the generation, which I
think make sense, because a generation event is a one-off, while the
agent who made the annotation could move around and still be the same
agent (according to OA use), and an annotation would be a more
abstract concept that don't normally live in a physical location.

Then in PROV-O:

<annotation> a oa:Annotation ;
    prov:qualifiedGeneration [
        prov:atLocation <geolocation>
    ] ;

In PAV we have the shortcut pav:createdAt for this relation.


The alternative, that Robert talks about, also makes sense, but you
are then implying something more about the 'annotation' activity:

<annotation> a oa:Annotatoin ;
    prov:wasGeneratedBy [
        prov:atLocation <geolocation>
    ] .

This requires the generating activity to always be at the same
location - let's say the activity is the Google Maps Streetview car -
each individual picture is taken at different locations. With putting
atLocation on the Generation there is no problem - the activity does
not have to be place-bound, but then each generation is.   In the
approach right above, the activity would have to be limited to "Taking
this picture" rather than "Mapping Manchester" - forcing it to be much
more fine-grained.

So the most flexible option would be to put it on the generation - but
if you know the activity did not 'move', and you perhaps also want to
say something else about the activity (such as what other entities it
used or which agents where involved) - then putting the location on
the activity makes more sense.

I don't think there is a need for an oa:madeAtLocation kind of
property - there would be more pressing provenance attributions that
should be thought of first - and I would prefer for OA to rather point
to existing models like PROV and PAV.


On 25 July 2013 19:30, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The use of prov:atLocation, associated with the annotating activity seems
> like a good approach to me at the PROV level.  To follow the mapping into
> the OA predicates, I think your suggested annotatedAtLocation is the right
> term with a clear translation into the full PROV model.
>
> Any PROV folks like to comment? Stian? Antoine?
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> In second analysis, I believe that seems ok if we associate
>> prov:atLocation to the Activity of 'annotating'?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Paolo Ciccarese
>> <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Rob,
>>> that is a good point.
>>>
>>> As I would like to record the location of the 'annotation creation', it
>>> would probably be better to have something like oa:annotatedAtLocation then?
>>> That would be more consistent with the OA model. Unfortunately it seems
>>> less in line with how others do it :/
>>>
>>> I see in PROV the property: http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#atLocation
>>> but I am still not sure the definition ("The Location of any resource.")
>>> is compatible with what I am trying to do.
>>>
>>> Maybe we can ask to the PROV folks?
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Paolo,
>>>>
>>>> While I'm happy with using the geo ontology, I'm not sure that
>>>> geo:location is the right predicate to use with the Annotation, given the
>>>> collapsing of the annotation document/concept.  Is it the annotating or
>>>> serializing activity, in PROV terms, which the location is referring to?
>>>>
>>>> The ontology defines geo:location as:
>>>>     "The relation between something and the point, or other geometrical
>>>> thing in space, where it is."
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure that the location of the annotator at the time they created
>>>> the annotation concept is "where it [the annotation] is."  That seems more
>>>> like the location of the storage system (annotation as document) or just not
>>>> a point in space (annotation as a concept).
>>>>
>>>> Could you explain how you would see the mapping into the PROV model?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Rob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Paolo Ciccarese
>>>> <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I was looking into recording the geolocation at the annotation level
>>>>> (where the annotation has been generated, not the body).
>>>>>
>>>>> Is the vocabulary:
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#
>>>>> the best option?
>>>>>
>>>>> How do we recommend to link it to the annotation?
>>>>>
>>>>> I was looking at this:
>>>>> http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations_and_Geo_/_Location_Data
>>>>>
>>>>> Are we good with this?
>>>>> geo:location [ geo:lat "48.0802626"; geo:long "11.6407428". ].
>>>>>
>>>>> vCard seems another options as explained in that page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Paolo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
>>>>> http://www.paolociccarese.info/
>>>>> Biomedical Informatics Research & Development
>>>>> Instructor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School
>>>>> Assistant in Neuroscience at Mass General Hospital
>>>>> Member of the MGH Biomedical Informatics Core
>>>>> +1-857-366-1524 (mobile)   +1-617-768-8744 (office)
>>>>>
>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the
>>>>> addressee(s), may contain information that is considered
>>>>> to be sensitive or confidential and may not be forwarded or disclosed
>>>>> to any other party without the permission of the sender.
>>>>> If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
>>>>> immediately.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
>>> http://www.paolociccarese.info/
>>> Biomedical Informatics Research & Development
>>> Instructor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School
>>> Assistant in Neuroscience at Mass General Hospital
>>> Member of the MGH Biomedical Informatics Core
>>> +1-857-366-1524 (mobile)   +1-617-768-8744 (office)
>>>
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the
>>> addressee(s), may contain information that is considered
>>> to be sensitive or confidential and may not be forwarded or disclosed to
>>> any other party without the permission of the sender.
>>> If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
>>> immediately.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
>> http://www.paolociccarese.info/
>> Biomedical Informatics Research & Development
>> Instructor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School
>> Assistant in Neuroscience at Mass General Hospital
>> Member of the MGH Biomedical Informatics Core
>> +1-857-366-1524 (mobile)   +1-617-768-8744 (office)
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the
>> addressee(s), may contain information that is considered
>> to be sensitive or confidential and may not be forwarded or disclosed to
>> any other party without the permission of the sender.
>> If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
>> immediately.
>
>



-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
http://soiland-reyes.com/stian/work/ http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Received on Friday, 26 July 2013 08:53:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 26 July 2013 08:53:16 UTC