- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 01:35:04 -0600
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: www-archive+geo@w3.org
I want to use lat/long to describe airports, meeting rooms etc.; they're not points, are they? "If we encounter a description of a Point, call it ?X, and another, call it ?Y, and ?X and ?Y have identical values for their 'lat' and 'long' and 'alt' properties, we can conclude that ?X == ?Y, ie. that ?X and ?Y represent the self-same thing." -- http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/ That seems too constrained. Suppose I'm in the KC airport... we might say :DanC geo:lat "39.2975"; geo:long "-94.71389"; geo:alt "0". :KCIAirport geo:lat "39.2975"; geo:long "-94.71389"; geo:alt "0". Do you really want to conclude that :DanC = :KCIAirport. ? You might say that my lat/long isn't *exactly* the same as the airport's, but it's a real hassle to make sure no two things ever get the same lat/long, right? Perhaps I should say :DanC geo:atPoint [ geo:lat "39.2975"; ...]. but that's a tedious and, imo, useless indirection. I like the design of... http://www.cyc.com/cycdoc/vocab/spatial-vocab.html#SpatialThing hmm... Austin and Texas are considered points in... http://www.cyc.com/cycdoc/vocab/spatial-vocab.html#pointOnPath but note that (per http://opencyc.sourceforge.net/daml/cyc.daml) the domain of pointOnPath is cyc:Thing, i.e. rdfs:Resource. Looking at the test data... <geo:Point> <rdfs:label>abingdon</rdfs:label> <geo:lat>51.4017594</geo:lat> <geo:long>1.1757167</geo:long> </geo:Point> abingdon is a point? That doesn't appeal to me. some background questions... "The origin of this workspace was the 2003-01-09 discussion in the RDF Interest Group IRC channel." -- http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2003-01-09 Oh... yeah... I remember that. I don't recall anybody agreeing to anything in particular, but no matter... "Currently we have only a very minimalistic RDF vocabulary" -- http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/ who is "we"? The page is only signed by you. It claims "we" are accountable to the #rdfig channel... hmm... not a very reliable mechanism. If I want to participate, do I need to read all the logs? I'm using email, since you're not in #rdfig just now, with copy to www-archive+geo (unprecedented/unreserved, I believe). -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 02:35:38 UTC