Frans,
My answer to this is: because space and time are not independent of each other - they are aspects of location, maybe better termed "setting." A very large proportion of data on natural phenomena come to us as {x,y,z,t} and time has been split out previously because it is challenging to keep them together, and a lot of good work can be done with a "snapshot" view. GeoJSON models geographic features; it is increasingly recognized that events (and periods and processes) are dynamic geographic features. So I would say "when" was an important omission from GeoJSON. If there were a TimeJSON (and Topotime is aimed at that), "where" will be similarly important. I think of them as perspectives on the same thing(s).
Karl
> An interesting observation. I tried to read this discussion and - not being that familiar with GeoJSON -
> wondered why the community apparently has not chosen to hand over the problem of specification of
> time to TimeJSON. Is it because TimeJSON does not exist?
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2014 16:10:01 UTC