- From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:10:02 +0000
- To: "MacPherson, Deborah" <dmacpherson@CANNONDESIGN.COM>
- Cc: "rreck@rrecktek.com" <rreck@rrecktek.com>, W3C GLD WG <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
> The US National Building Information Modeling Standard (NBIMS) > version 2 is about to be published. I submitted a ballot for > compliance with W3CXML because a couple projects were veering too > far off into special flavors of XML; and as we move forward other > W3C standards such as Scalable Vector Graphics and RDF are > underutilized. We are forming a Data Architecture committee and at > some point would like to have a meeting about NBIMS and W3C > standards. What is the best way to exchange ideas to help move both > efforts along in harmonization? Ah, good to know. TBH, I wasn't aware of NBIMS et al. I'd strongly argue to follow the way the SDMX community went with their (abstract) Information Model [1] which allows whatever syntax one needs/wants to be build on top of it. Another example that essentially is doing it the same way is Dublin Core - again, the semantics of the terms such as 'creator' are defined and then, along with it, for example, how to represent that in RDF, etc. The point is: syntax doesn't matter (Web developers would prefer JSON, others maybe XML, etc.) but what matters are clear semantics which *can* perfectly well be communicated in UML + natural language. The likes of OWL, RDFS, etc. are nice, complementary features for certain domains, but what really matters, IMO, are solid semantics + usage examples. Cheers, Michael [1] http://sdmx.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/SDMX_2-1-1_SECTION_2_InformationModel_201108.pdf -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ http://sw-app.org/about.html On 31 Jan 2012, at 14:59, MacPherson, Deborah wrote: > Thanks, glad this was helpful. Building data is advancing. > > The US National Building Information Modeling Standard (NBIMS) > version 2 is about to be published. I submitted a ballot for > compliance with W3CXML because a couple projects were veering too > far off into special flavors of XML; and as we move forward other > W3C standards such as Scalable Vector Graphics and RDF are > underutilized. We are forming a Data Architecture committee and at > some point would like to have a meeting about NBIMS and W3C > standards. What is the best way to exchange ideas to help move both > efforts along in harmonization? > > Regards > > Deborah MacPherson > > DEBORAH MACPHERSON, CSI CCS, AIA > Specifications and Research > > Cannon Design > 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 2900 > Arlington, Virginia 22209 > > Direct Line 703 907 2353 > 4 Digit Dial 6353 > > dmacpherson@cannondesign.com > cannondesign.com > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Hausenblas [mailto:michael.hausenblas@deri.org] > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 10:28 AM > To: rreck@rrecktek.com > Cc: W3C GLD WG; MacPherson, Deborah > Subject: Re: ISSUE-23: How to relate a person to a building/room? > [People] > > > Excellent, thanks, Ronald (and Deborah!) > > As I said, maybe we should focus on the use cases first, then derive > requirements and determine if building/rooms (and any other entity > type, really) is in scope or not. > > In any case, this is valuable insight and will certainly be of great > use, down the line ... > > Cheers, > Michael > -- > Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow > LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre > DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National > University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ > http://sw-app.org/about.html > > On 30 Jan 2012, at 15:23, Ronald P. Reck wrote: > >> My friend Deborah and I have discussed this and similar issues for >> several years now, and this is what she replied when I asked her. >> She is willing to talk about it, if anyone would like to find out >> more. >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: RE: ISSUE-23: How to relate a person to a building/room? >> [People] >> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:13:18 -0500 >> From: MacPherson, Deborah <dmacpherson@CANNONDESIGN.COM> >> To: rreck@rrecktek.com <rreck@rrecktek.com> >> >> Hi Ron >> >> To represent buildings - OmniClass Tables 11 and 12 >> (http://www.omniclass.org >> ) is facility types by function and by form, Table 11 (function) is >> currently being updated. Attached is a mapping between existing Table >> 11 with International Code Council occupancy classes. >> >> There is also OGC CityGML http://schemas.opengis.net/citygml/. Even >> though the facility types are not very good, CityGML is still a >> useful >> overall schema that includes geometry. >> >> The Open Standards for Real Estate Consortium (OSCRE) has a terrific >> new proposal for Real Property Unique ID's (RPUID) like vehicle >> identification numbers, need a non-profit org like ICANN to >> maintain a >> registry. >> >> RE: VCard - the IETF and SmartGrid people are working on some >> interesting ideas to identify building capabilities at a glance... >> >> Moving inside the building: >> >> For rooms - OmniClass Tables 13 and 14 - spaces by function and >> spaces >> by form. Table 13 was just approved by the US National Building >> Information Modeling Standard (NBIMS). Table 14 is in development and >> is an ideal link to GIS. >> >> To relate a person to the building/room - ideal would be pulling a >> subset from NIEM with extensive definitions and relations about >> people, and the attached spreadsheet. >> >> RE: the Buildings and Rooms Vocabulary [1] would in fact be capable >> to >> do this, however the namespace is sub-optimal, in terms of stability. >> I think the classes are all wrong and need to be more like the >> attached "NBIMHierarchicalRelationship" where a room is part of a >> floor rather than vice-versa. Also "zone" is more a appropriate >> concept than floor section. "Desk" might not be as useful as "Seat" >> if tracking computers and workers. >> >> "Occupant" is the right concept for a person - however - there more >> parameters such as typical operating hours, whether people live there >> etc. are needed to be useful. >> >> Finally "Facility" is the preferred term because building is both a >> noun and a verb and has all kinds of other connotations in other >> domains. >> >> Regards, >> >> Deb >> >> >> DEBORAH MACPHERSON, CSI CCS, AIA >> Specifications and Research >> >> Cannon Design >> 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 2900 >> Arlington, Virginia 22209 >> >> Direct Line 703 907 2353 >> 4 Digit Dial 6353 >> >> dmacpherson@cannondesign.com >> cannondesign.com >> >> ü Please consider the environment before printing this email. >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: ISSUE-23: How to relate a person to a building/room? >> [People] >> Resent-Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 11:07:29 +0000 >> Resent-From: public-gld-wg@w3.org >> Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 11:07:24 +0000 >> From: Government Linked Data Working Group Issue Tracker >> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org >>> >> Reply-To: Government Linked Data Working Group WG >> <public-gld-wg@w3.org >>> >> To: public-gld-wg@w3.org >> >> >> ISSUE-23: How to relate a person to a building/room? [People] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/23 >> >> Raised by: Michael Hausenblas >> On product: People >> >> There are really two issues here, namely how to represent buildings >> and rooms and how to relate a person to the building/room. It seems >> that the Buildings and Rooms Vocabulary [1] would in fact be capable >> to do this, however the namespace is sub-optimal, in terms of >> stability. >> >> [1] http://vocab.deri.ie/rooms# >> >> >> <NBIMHierarchicalRelationship.jpg><FacilityTypeTemplate.xls> >
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2012 15:10:44 UTC