Re: A proposal for two additional properties for LOCN

Thanks for preparing the proposal, Frans.

My comments below:

1. For both properties, I wouldn't specify their domain and range, but
I would add a usage note. I would also define them only as
rdf:Property's, at least for the moment.

2. Should these properties be made more generic, so that they can be
used also to specify the temporal ref system / resolution?

3. For (spatial) resolution, I think we should find a way to specify
arbitrary units of measure - I wouldn't exclude a priori the
possibility of encoding them as literals (e.g., 5m, 100x100px).

Andrea


On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 2:22 AM,  <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
> Ø  As for using xsd:anyURI, I am happy with it (I would probably prefer
> having a class CRS with instances for it
>
> +1
>
> Yes – I do not like to see anyURI as the range for anything, except for a
> property whose job is to assign an identifier.
>
> If you want to defer specifying a range, then make it an owl:ObjectProperty
> .
>
>
>
> From: Oscar Corcho [mailto:ocorcho@fi.upm.es]
> Sent: Wednesday, 3 September 2014 4:34 AM
> To: Frans Knibbe | Geodan; LocAdd W3C CG Public Mailing list
> Subject: Re: A proposal for two additional properties for LOCN
>
>
>
> Dear Frans,
>
>
>
> For the use cases that I have in mind, the first one covers well the needs
> that I had. I would probably use a shorter qName, such as locn:crs, which
> should be in general well understood.
>
>
>
> With respect to the domain, I cannot understand well why you want to
> associated it to a Dataset, and I would probably leave it associated to
> locn:Geometry, or even leave the domain unspecified.
>
>
>
> As for using xsd:anyURI, I am happy with it (I would probably prefer having
> a class CRS with instances for it, as I think that was suggested by Ghislain
> Atemezing some time ago, but having the anyURI datatype seems sufficient to
> me at this point.
>
>
>
> Oscar
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Oscar Corcho
>
> Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
>
> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
>
> Facultad de Informática
>
> Campus de Montegancedo s/n
>
> Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, España
>
> Tel. (+34) 91 336 66 05
>
> Fax  (+34) 91 352 48 19
>
>
>
> De: Frans Knibbe | Geodan <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
> Fecha: lunes, 1 de septiembre de 2014 14:49
> Para: LocAdd W3C CG Public Mailing list <public-locadd@w3.org>
> Asunto: A proposal for two additional properties for LOCN
> Nuevo envío de: <public-locadd@w3.org>
> Fecha de nuevo envío: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 12:50:48 +0000
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have made a wiki page for a provisional proposal for the addition of two
> new properties to the Location Core Vocabulary: CRS and spatial resolution.
> I would welcome your thoughts and comments.
>
> The proposal is based on earlier discussions on this list. I am not certain
> about any of it, but I think starting with certain definitions can help in
> eventually getting something that is good to work with.
>
> Some questions that I can come up with are:
>
> Are the semantics of the two properties really absent from the semantic web
> at the moment?
> Is the Location Core Vocabulary an appropriate place to add them?
> Is the proposed way of modelling the two properties right? Could conflicts
> with certain use cases occur?
>
> More detailed questions are on the wiki page.
>
> Regards,
> Frans
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Frans Knibbe
> Geodan
> President Kennedylaan 1
> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)
>
> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347
> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl
> www.geodan.nl | disclaimer
>
> ________________________________



-- 
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

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/

----
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, 4 September 2014 08:04:52 UTC