W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-ssn@w3.org > December 2009

RE: ISSUE-3 (Modules for sensor, data and process): Ontology modules aligned with use cases [sensor ontology - http://mmisw.org/orr/#http://www.w3.org/2009/SSN-XG/Ontologies/SensorBasis.owl - 09.12.15 ]

From: Simon Cox <simon.cox@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:57:54 +0100
To: "'John Graybeal'" <jbgraybeal@mindspring.com>, "'Semantic Sensor Network Incubator Group WG'" <public-xg-ssn@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9563F137D250480EA27F07ABEFA9B71F@MANTA>
+1

-----Original Message-----
From: public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of John Graybeal
Sent: 17 December 2009 07:33
To: Semantic Sensor Network Incubator Group WG
Subject: Re: ISSUE-3 (Modules for sensor, data and process): Ontology
modules aligned with use cases [sensor ontology -
http://mmisw.org/orr/#http://www.w3.org/2009/SSN-XG/Ontologies/SensorBasis.o
wl - 09.12.15 ]

The Issue database didn't seem to have a way to add comments, so I'll  
just make a brief note via the mail.  I don't know that this follows.   
I think device discovery, data discovery, and provenance can easily  
cut across any and all aspects of a sensor, and therefore can easily  
exercise all aspects of the ontology. _Structuring_ the ontology to  
match the use case seems an unusual step from that standpoint.  It  
should be able to validate the use case, but that doesn't require a  
mirrored structure, does it?

John


On Dec 16, 2009, at 12:43, Semantic Sensor Network Incubator Group  
Issue Tracker wrote:

>
> ISSUE-3 (Modules for sensor, data and process): Ontology modules  
> aligned with use cases [sensor ontology - http://mmisw.org/orr/ 
> #http://www.w3.org/2009/SSN-XG/Ontologies/SensorBasis.owl - 09.12.15 ]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/track/issues/3
>
> Raised by: Laurent Lefort
> On product: sensor ontology -
http://mmisw.org/orr/#http://www.w3.org/2009/SSN-XG/Ontologies/SensorBasis.o
wl 
>  - 09.12.15
>
> The Use cases reviewed in
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Use_cases 
>  are organised into sub-categories:
> - Device discovery	
> - Data discovery
> - Process/provenance
>
> The ontology structure should mirror three sub-categories so that we  
> can identify and discuss "simple" uses cases where only one sub- 
> module is needed and complex use cases where all the modules are  
> needed.
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 17 December 2009 07:58:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 17 December 2009 07:58:43 GMT