W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > April 2014

Re: TGN place types (broader/narrower spanning ConceptSchemes)

From: Walter Koch <kochw@ait.co.at>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:27:48 +0200
Message-ID: <533A8694.6080508@ait.co.at>
To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
CC: 'Kate Fernie' <kate.fernie@mdrprojects.com>
Supporting Richards comment it might also be useful to harmonize 
vocabularies, e.g. placetypes (categories?):

IDEF5 Ontology Languages (http://www.idef.com/IDEF5.htm) might also be 
useful for ontology modeling, especially:
temporal, spacial, and meronymic relations (attached, D.23 & D.24).


Am 01.04.2014 09:58, schrieb Richard Light:
> On 01/04/2014 07:07, Osma Suominen wrote:
>> On 30/03/14 11:15, Christophe Dupriez wrote:
>>> In this precise case, I would model whatever is needed using the most
>>> suitable vocabularies available if any.
>>> And I would add (automatically if possible) SKOS relations to guide the
>>> documentary retrieval engine.
>>> I.e. I would model without constraints something ontologically "rock
>>> solid" and then derive a "publishing" structure using SKOS.
>> +1 for this approach from me too.
> Yes, I'd agree with that approach too.  What would be /really/ helpful 
> for end-users would be if the various historically-aware place 
> authorities (SAPO, TGN, Pelagios, PastPlace, ...) all used the /same 
> /ontological structure to express statements about places in time.  
> Possibly something CIDOC CRM-based?
> Richard
>> This is what we are doing with the Finnish Spatio-Temporal Ontology 
>> SAPO [1]. The ontology itself is modelled using OWL, and has two main 
>> classes, time-bound places (similar in spirit to "Crimea after 
>> Russian annexation in 2014") and time-independent places (e.g. 
>> "Crimea", "Ukraine"). The relations between time-independent and 
>> time-dependent places are modelled separately - the current idea is 
>> to use the CHANGE vocabulary [2] to model the events (establishment, 
>> merge, split etc) that form the time series, but other 
>> representations for the representation including a simple 
>> part-of/includes property have been used in the past.
>> For publishing purposes, a SKOS representation is derived, simply by 
>> defining rdfs:subClassOf and rdfs:subPropertyOf relationships that 
>> map the classes and properties of the ontology to a simplified SKOS 
>> view. The conversion itself is implemented using the Skosify tool 
>> [3]. Of course, SPARQL construct queries could have been used here as 
>> well, though Skosify does some additional validation and enrichment 
>> on the conversion result.
>> -Osma
>> [1] http://www.seco.tkk.fi/ontologies/sapo/
>> [2] http://www.linkedearth.org/change/ns/
>> [3] http://code.google.com/p/skosify/
> -- 
> *Richard Light*

Univ.-Prof.em.Dr.Walter KOCH
Angewandte Informationstechnik Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
Klosterwiesgasse 32/1; A-8010 Graz; Austria
TEL:+43(316)835359-0 * FAX:+43(316)835359-75 * Mobile:+43.664.3556521
e-mail: kochw@ait.co.at     *    Skype:  kochwgraz

Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2014 11:02:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:46:36 UTC