W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-ig@w3.org > July 2017

Re: Mappings between SSN & WoT TD

From: María Poveda <mpoveda@fi.upm.es>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:33:59 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+mx6Z3A0OX7aFWh4rs5bgbXOZXZWwArwUA2gGZbcQMk_JxvvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>
Cc: MEDINI LIONEL <lionel.medini@univ-lyon1.fr>, "Le Phuoc, Danh" <danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de>, Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>
Hi Maxime,

  sorry for the late reply. Thank you very much for the suggestions and
typos spotted. We are processing your suggestions and I guess most of them
should be accepted by the WG. Somethings will be difficult to do as
changing the  to wot:PropertyInteractionPattern as it was a discussion
about that in the WG and the decision was to reduce the names as much as
possible.

We'll be back to you. I include Raul in cc as I'm afraid he is not getting
the emails.


Best,

María

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr
> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Following Lionel Medini's request to provide an initial alignment between
> the SOSA/SSN and the WoT ontology (see mail below),
>
> Considering the TD JSON-LD context are at
>  - http://w3c.github.io/wot/w3c-wot-td-context.jsonld
>  - http://w3c.github.io/wot/w3c-wot-common-context.jsonld
>
> and considering that these contexts refer to the ontologies at
>   "td": "http://iot.linkeddata.es/def/wot#", and
> "saref": "http://uri.etsi.org/m2m/saref#", (shouldn't it be
> https://w3id.org/saref# ?)
>
> I would rather open the discussion to Raul, Maria and Victor. My initial
> guess for an alignment between the SOSA/SSN ontology and the VICINITY wot
> ontology would be:
>
> wot:Thing rdfs:subClassOf ssn:System .
> wot:providesInteractionPattern rdfs:subPropertyOf ssn:implements .
> wot:InteractionPattern rdfs;subClassOf sosa:Procedure .
> wot:hasInputData rdfs:subPropertyOf ssn:hasInput
> wot:hasOutputData rdfs:subPropertyOf ssn:hasOutput
>
>
> @authors of the wot ontology, some preliminary comments:
> - I just noticed what may be typos in the definition of wot:MediaType:
> estructured --> structured, os --> of , Definicion --> Definition
> - typo in the label of wot:isReadableThrough
> - I would suggest to rename wot:Property to wot:PropertyInteractionPattern
> to avoid confusion with ssn:Property
> - same for wot:Event and wot:Action ?
> - do you really want to impose the use of OM for units of measures ? or
> could we use QUDT instead ?
> - instead of wot:DataSchema, couldn't we use the class
> rdfp:GraphPresentation from the RDFP ( https://w3id.org/rdfp/ ) ontology
> to generalize a bit to any RDF Graph that has some validation rules /
> lifting rules / lowering rules ? That could help to cover cases where input
> data or output data do not solely consist in a quantity value  (ex. some
> text, concepts, or force and torque values)
> - could we have wot: properties that map to the CoRE resource directory rt
> (resource type) and if (interface) Web Link target attributes ? see RFC6690
> - instead of a property with a boolean range, I've heard it's good
> practice to use classes instead --> disjoint classes RequiredProperty and
> OptionalProperty ?
>
> Some other suggestions come to my mind, but that should be a good starting
> point to develop discuss further the development of that nice wot ontology
> and it's alignment to SSN.
>
> @Lionel, some more comments inline
>
> Best,
> Maxime Lefrançois
>
>  Le ven. 7 juil. 2017 à 16:41, MEDINI LIONEL <lionel.medini@univ-lyon1.fr>
> a écrit :
>
>> Hi Maxime,
>>
>>
>>
>> As I understand, Danh won’t have time to answer this email, so I rely on
>> you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Currently, I have mapped sosa:Platform as subclass of wot:Thing.
>>
>
> Because I would like to align ssn:implements with wot:providesInteractionPattern,
> then I suggested to align ssn:System to wot:Thing instead.
>
>
>> In order to show requests that are able to do more complex things than
>> retrieving instances of WoT Thing, I will need more mappings between the 2
>> ontologies. For instance, it would be good if we could retrieve all things
>> in a given area (deployment ?),
>>
>
> Deployment should not be considered here, you can add lat/long coordinates
> to anything provided that it is physical --> sosa:Platform, sosa:Sensor,
> sosa:Actuator, sosa:Sampling, ssn:System... (not sure about ssn:Deployment
> because it's aligned to dul:Event....)
>
>
>> or a list of available temperature sensors by querying TD classes and
>> properties.
>>
>
>>
>> Do you have / could you provide me with a turtle file stating such
>> mappings?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your help,
>>
>>
>>
>> Lionel.
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> Lionel Médini - associate professor
>>
>> LIRIS Lab / University of Lyon
>>
>> Phone: +33 4 72 43 16 36 <04%2072%2043%2016%2036>
>>
>> Fax: +33 4 72 43 15 36 <04%2072%2043%2015%2036>
>>
>> mailto:lionel.medini@liris.cnrs.fr <lionel.medini@liris.cnrs.fr>
>>
>> https://liris.cnrs.fr/lionel.medini/
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
María Poveda Villalón, PhD

Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Madrid, Spain

e-mail: mpoveda@fi.upm.es
website: http://mariapoveda.github.io/
blog: http://thepetiteontologist.wordpress.com/
Received on Thursday, 27 July 2017 14:34:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 27 July 2017 14:34:52 UTC