- From: Frans Knibbe | Geodan <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:52:42 +0100
- To: public-gdw-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <546B5D3A.70403@geodan.nl>
On 2014-11-04 6:45, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote: [snip] > I hope this contribution can be considered as input to the Sensor Ontology activity within the Spatial Data on the Web working group. I hope so too! I have just looked at the ontologies and the paper and now I am bursting with questions. It's a pity the WG has not started yet. To me it looks like a very meaningful contribution and just the sort of work that should be discussed and experimented with in the new Working Group. Well, the charter does speak only of further developing the SSN vocabulary, but one mentioned direction of development is splitting the ontology up in smaller, simpler sections. I can imagine that at least some of those sections will be inspired by om-lite and sam-lite, and be less burdened by complex imported models. I also see a strong relationship with the general question of the best way to model uncertainty/error/resolution in space, time and other measurable quantities. Regards, Frans ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Frans Knibbe Geodan President Kennedylaan 1 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl www.geodan.nl <http://www.geodan.nl> | disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2014 14:53:14 UTC