- From: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
- Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 01:37:09 +0200
- To: Frans Knibbe | Geodan <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
- Cc: "public-locadd@w3.org Mailing list" <public-locadd@w3.org>
Interesting work, Frans! Thanks a lot for sharing it. My comments inline. > [snip] > > About metadata: The dataset URI (http://lod.geodan.nl/basisreg/bag/) > resolves to dataset metadata. Because this dataset contains location data > (locations, addresses, geometries) I think some special metadata are called > for. > > Issue 1: I feel that it is important to let it be known that a dataset is > of a geographical nature, i.e., a consumer could expect data about locations > in the data. As far as I know, there is no well established way of making > such a statement. For this dataset, I specified <http://www.w3.org/ns/locn> > as one of the main vocabularies used (using void:vocabulary) and I specified > the spatial extent of the data (using dcterms:spatial). WDYT? Not sure this is enough. The use of dcterms:spatial and of the LOCN vocabulary does not mean that the dataset is about "location data". In VoID there's the following example: :Geonames a void:Dataset; dcterms:subject <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Location> . See http://www.w3.org/TR/void/#subject > [snip] > > Issue 3: CRS: I can think of no way to specify the CRS used in the data. An > extension of LOCN to enable this would be welcome, I think. +1 from me. > Issue 4: Level of Detail / Spatial resolution: This would be applicable to > the subsets (which are named graphs) within the dataset. I think that > information could be useful to consumers, but I can not think of a way to > express this. Probably, this can be addressed by a specific extension of the LOCN vocabulary, as for point (3). > About geometry: > > Issue 5: The geometries in the source data use the Dutch national CRS. I > have transformed them to WGS84 lon/lat for several reasons: > a) The triple store used (Virtuoso) does not support other CRSs yet > b) I really do not like WKT literals with prefixed CRS URIs, as mandated by > GeoSPARQL > c) the CRS is more common, especially internationally it will be more > useful. > > The only drawback I can think of is that this transformation would not do > with very detailed geometries. Because these data are European, it would be > better to use ETRS89. The current standard is far more useful for American > data than for data from other continents! I wonder whether you had any feedback from the Virtuoso team on whether they plan to support other CRSs and how - I mean, if following GeoSPARQL or (also) with the CRS specified separately from the geometry. > [snip] > > About application of LOCN: > > Issue 7: If you take a look at the vocabulary I made for this dataset > (http://lod.geodan.nl/vocab/bag or http://lod.geodan.nl/vocab/bag.ttl), you > can see that I tried to apply LOCN. Mostly, classes are defined as being > subclasses of LOCN classes and properties are defined as being subproperties > of LOCN properties. But without special measures, one can not use LOCN terms > in SPARQL queries. The following example returns nothing because I have not > created explicit triples for locn classes, and neither have I made > inference rules. So I wonder if it is really worthwhile to use LOCN, or to > use it in the way that I have. > > [snip] > > Or to put in different words: what is the added value of LOCN in this case? > And how could that added value be increased? Frans, could you please provide some details about your design choices for the vocabulary? E.g., if I understand correctly, you are modelling also changes to addresses and address components. I wonder whether this would be in scope of the LOCN vocabulary or of a specific extension. A few more specific comments. 1. Naming errors: - "a rdfs:class" instead of "a rdfs:Class" - "a rdfs:property" instead of "a rdf:Property" - "a locn:Location" instead of "a dcterms:Location" 2. It seems that :Woonplaats is both a class and property instance ("a locn:postName"): :Woonplaats a rdfs:class; a locn:Location; a geosparql:SpatialObject; a locn:postName; 3. Always about :Woonplaats (but this applies also to other classes), why is it an instance, and not a subclass of dcterms:Location? Cheers, Andrea
Received on Friday, 9 May 2014 23:37:52 UTC