- From: Chris Beer <chris@e-beer.net.au>
- Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 12:06:59 +1100
- To: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
- Cc: William Waites <ww@styx.org>, Leigh Dodds <leigh.dodds@talis.com>, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>, W3C e-Gov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <482873B5-9DC8-4A0F-B08B-8B99F63F3324@e-beer.net.au>
http://www.w3.org/2010/POI Chris Beer (iPhone) On 09/11/2010, at 11:43, Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> wrote: > Just so. > > GIS systems decide on a resolution and then do the math. GIS is a tool for decision making. It is not a statistical reporting tool though, and if you are not the decision (or policy) maker it's not scholarship, it's art and I'll grant, good proof of transparency intentions too. > > BTW "Censorship" was another thread > > --- On Mon, 11/8/10, William Waites <ww@styx.org> wrote: > > From: William Waites <ww@styx.org> > Subject: Re: Censorship? > To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> > Cc: "Leigh Dodds" <leigh.dodds@talis.com>, "Mike Norton" <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>, "W3C e-Gov IG" <public-egov-ig@w3.org> > Date: Monday, November 8, 2010, 5:48 PM > > On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 03:28:12PM -0800, Gannon Dick wrote: > > > > Latitude and Longitude are a complete coordinate system - the > > ordering is a continuous function. Entity Names and > > Vocabulary Encoding Schemes form a complete set, something a > > bit different. > > If I understand correctly, you see a problem with RDF where > there is no standard way to express things other than points? > Such as lines, polygons, polygons with holes, multipolygons, > geometry collections, the whole suite of shapes that GIS > systems normally deal with? > > If so I think you are partially right. As far as I know there > has been little work done in modelling these sorts of things > in RDF, and I think the triplestores that have even very basic > support for geodata (e.g. points) only support the simplest > of operations with them (e.g. bounding box or radius search). > > That said there's no reason you couldn't express more complex > shapes in RDF. The process would be fairly mechanical (e.g. > straightforward translation of WKT, KML or whatever) this > is already a very well understood area. > > By far the easiest way to deal with it is just to put WKT > into, e.g. dc:spatial (maybe we need a WKT datatype) and > use any GIS system you like to do the actual indexing. Maybe > add some built-in functions to a SPARQL engine to help with > querying... > > Or have I misunderstood completely? > > And what does this have to do with censorship? > > Cheers, > -w >
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 01:07:04 UTC