W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Reviewing the GeoSPARQL document?

From: Matthew Perry <matthew.perry@oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 07:19:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <f50e7fde-6c76-44c8-afe8-52ddd37dc8c4@default>
To: <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Cc: <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi Axel,

I'm editor of the GeoSPARQL document. I can give a brief overview of it during Tuesday's meeting.

Thanks,
Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: axel.polleres@deri.org
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 7:18:26 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Fwd: Reviewing the GeoSPARQL document?

Forwarding this with Ivan's permission... the Open Geospatial Consortium [1] asks us for a review of their GeoSPARQL specification.
Would anybody volunteer to have a look and provide a review in the name of our group? (will put this under next week's agenda's admin issues)

Axel


>> On 16 Feb 2011, at 08:55, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> 
>>> Lee, Axel,
>>> 
>>> we have recently received a copy of the Draft Candidate Standard of the Open Geospatial Consortium[1] called GeoSPARQL. I have put a copy of the document on our site[2]. OGC would like us (where 'us' means the W3C SPARQL community in their words) to have a look at the document and give them our comments. 
>>> 
>>> A *very* cursory look at the document reveals that the document defines a general vocabulary, including datatypes, for GeoSpatial information (that may not be relevant for the SPARQL group only), but they also define a set of domain specific SPARQL filter functions as well as what they call 'query transformation rules'. 
>>> 
>>> The filter functions should be looked into in any case, and be compared with the current work of the WG on defining filter functions (eg, if there are overlaps, the way they are defined, etc). 
>>> 
>>> The transformation seems to be some sort of a 'macro' like facility to change a simple query pattern into something more complex, ie, Query Pattern -> Query Pattern transformations defined via RIF rules. (Sandro, would it be necessary/useful to have somebody from the RIF community look at this, too? If so, who?)
>>> 
>>> They are obviously interested in our technical comments. But, I believe, we should also make it sure that whatever ogc does in this area does not violate SPARQL 1.1; even better, some of their features might become easier with SPARQL 1.1, and that might be useful for them to know.
>>> 
>>> So, here comes of course the tough issue: do you think you could find somebody (singular or, better, plural) in the SPARQL WG who could look at this document? I would expect this to be interesting for vendors because, after all, services might provide these functionalities as an extra feature...
>>> 
>>> Thanks a lot!
>>> 
>>> Ivan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] http://www.opengeospatial.org/
>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/02/GeoSPARQL.pdf
>>> 
>>> ----
>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 26 February 2011 15:21:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:45 GMT