W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-locadd@w3.org > July 2013

Re: Proposal:GeoJSON

From: Strainu <strainu@strainu.ro>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 01:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1372754745.56956.YahooMailNeo@web163505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
To: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, LocAdd W3C CG Public Mailing list <public-locadd@w3.org>


>________________________________
> From: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>To: Strainu <strainu@strainu.ro> 
>Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>; LocAdd W3C CG Public Mailing list <public-locadd@w3.org> 
>Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 3:34 AM
>Subject: Re: Proposal:GeoJSON
> 
>
>
>Hi, Strainu.

Hi Andrea,


>
>
>I wonder whether the approach you are proposing can be generalised for other types of encoding / representation of geometries (WKT, GML, KML, RDF, or even human readable documents).

This sounds like an excellent idea. I would like to see some more feedback on this, but I suppose the best (best for me is "easiest to implement") approach would be to rename GeoJSON to GeoURL and add several new properties, like wktUrl, gmlUrl, kmlUrl etc. 


An alternative idea, perhaps somewhat better suited to how schema.org is structured right now would be to have a new topic for each of those representations and all of them are possible values to the geo property. I personally find this approach to bring complexity to the implementation without providing additional information to a parser.


>
>
>BTW, this could allow re-use of "geometry URIs" (as those operated by Placetime.com [1] and Ordnance Survey), i.e., URIs identifying geometries and resolving to different geometry encodings / representations, following Linked Data principles.

I think only the first solution above would be fit for that.

Regards,
   Strainu


>
>
>As an example, see:
>
>
>http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/id/geometry/37256-10
>
>
>
>which resolves to
>
>
>http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/geometry/37256-10
>
>
>
>The different supported representations have also specific URIs:
>
>
>http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/geometry/37256-10.html
>
>http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/geometry/37256-10.rdf
>
>http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/geometry/37256-10.ttl
>
>http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/geometry/37256-10.json
>
>
>
>Andrea
>
>
>Andrea
>
>
>----
>[1]http://vocab.org/placetime/geopoint/wgs84/
>
>
>
>On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Strainu <strainu@strainu.ro> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>>>I would like to propose another addition to the Geo* family of topics, namely GeoJSON. Is should be used to describe the geo property of a Place item by linking to a GeoJSON [1] file. The topic should contain no additional properties, with the url property from Thing being used to link to the file.
>>
>>Added wiki page: http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/GeoJSON
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>An alternative would be to allow the geo parameter to contain an URL, but that could lead to confusion as to the format of the file.
>>>>
>>>>The reason for this proposal is that many websites use geojson to fetch and render geographical information from remote location, without keeping the data locally. The GeoJSON format supports all the types of geo data included in GeoCoordinates and GeoShape.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>   Strainu
>>>>
>>>>[1] http://geojson.org/
>>>
>>
>>
>>Regards,
>>   Strainu
>>
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
>European Commission DG JRC
>Institute for Environment & Sustainability
>Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data
>Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
>21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>
>DE+RD Unit: http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/DE
>
>----
>The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
>not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
>position of the European Commission. 
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 08:46:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:54:28 UTC