- From: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
- Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 10:39:44 +0200
- To: Frans Knibbe | Geodan <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, "public-locadd@w3.org Mailing list" <public-locadd@w3.org>
Dear all, Thanks for starting up this thread Frans. I don't have a strong opinion on this issue, and, like you, I tend to think that space and orthogonal dimensions. However, there are a number of use cases where those dimensions are tied which trigger the question where we should not have a few handy predicates to handle those cases, among others : - the temporal validity of the spatial extent of a geographic feature: this is indeed a generic use case that can be applied to any resource (a solution is for example Memento) - the temporal evolution of the spatial extent of a geographic feature: the typical case is to represent the evolution of boundaries of a administrative unit - etc. I observe that: - since 1 month, there is a HUGE thread in the geojson community in order to be able to represent time together with space. Concrete proposals have been made, see https://github.com/geojson/geojson-ld/issues/ - OWL Time is a draft, unfinished, and criticized for a number of use cases. There has been an attempts 18 months ago from Ivan Herman and others to clean it up and publish it as a more stable /ns W3C vocab. But nothing really happened, everyone is busy. - as Andrea mentioned, this issue was of the key topics discussed at LGD'14. Best regards. 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/
Received on Saturday, 24 May 2014 09:38:03 UTC