W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: PROV-ISSUE-128 (Location-Example): Location example uses a filesystem and not a geographical location [Ontology]

From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 09:38:49 -0400
Message-Id: <E015BF5F-A0F2-4569-A7C5-C87C556E4B71@rpi.edu>
To: Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Note, a similar comment was raised by Eric in ISSUE-250:

  3.1.6

I was confused between the Class definition of location (geographic
location) and the example which was a directory path.     If we are
going to include directory paths then the definition of location needs
to be more general.

Comment on concern about “geospatial”:  Geospatial tends to be used to
refer to geographic data that is most likely used for processing or
analysis as opposed to something that is displayed on a map.
Recommend defer to the existing ISO standard definition.

-Tim



On Oct 20, 2011, at 5:31 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:

> 
> PROV-ISSUE-128 (Location-Example): Location example uses a filesystem and not a geographical location [Ontology]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/128
> 
> Raised by: Paul Groth
> On product: Ontology
> 
> I was looking at the definition of Location in the Ontology and the example talks about a file system path. This seems odd given that the general description of the concept is about a geospatial location. Can this be clarified?
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 16 April 2012 13:39:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:07:03 GMT