- From: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
- Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 01:16:41 +0100
- To: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
- Cc: Ghislain Atemezing <auguste.atemezing@eurecom.fr>, Kostis Kyzirakos <Kostis.Kyzirakos@cwi.nl>, Frans Knibbe | Geodan <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, LocAdd W3C CG Public Mailing list <public-locadd@w3.org>
- Message-id: <CAHzfgWB3vvF_VacJHO677AW+xwZ-6F2dxbqtPNdqoKdSnAMzkA@mail.gmail.com>
I'm also in favour of your proposal, Raphaël - i.e., keep using rdfs:seeAlso. And many thanks, Kostis, for providing a strong use case for this property, besides the INSPIRE one explained in my previous email [1] (again, apologies for being late in replying). About how to model GNIS IDs and other geographical identifiers, as I said in [1], a possible option would be to re-use adms:Identifier [2]. An alternative, is to create a specific, core class for this in the LOCN vocabulary, that can be extended depending on the requirements of different identifier schemes. Andrea ---- [1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-locadd/2014Jan/0076.html [2]http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-adms/#identifier On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>wrote: > So we can similarly say for locn, as you suggested something like: >> >> locn:identifier a owl:DatatypeProperty, rdf:Property ; >> rdfs:range [a rdfs:Datatype ; >> owl:unionOf (xsd:URI rdfs:Literal) .] ; >> Does it make sense? >> > > No. If you want that this URI to be interpreted as a URI and not as a > literal, then the identifier property cannot be a owl:DatatypeProperty. It > is an owl:ObjectProperty by definition. Since we want an unconstrained > range, we are out of OWL anyway, so the property will just be a > rdf:Property. > > > And add to the appropriate class in locn vocab an axiom like the one >> stated in org like: >> locn:aClass owl:hasKey (locn:identifier) ; >> > > * What would be the owl class: locn:Location? locn:Geometry? Something > else? > * Why would you like to make this property a key? This prevents to have > two geographic identifiers for the same object which sorts of ruins the > interoperability effort we are trying to achieve with this property. > I'm afraid I don't understand your proposal. > > > Raphaël > > -- > Raphaël Troncy > EURECOM, Campus SophiaTech > Multimedia Communications Department > 450 route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France. > e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com > Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242 > Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200 > Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/ > > -- 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 Thursday, 9 January 2014 00:17:22 UTC