Dutch translations added, questions about the original text.

Hello all!

Well, I could not live up to my promise of providing Dutch texts for the 
LOCN vocabulary earlier because I have been ill for two weeks. But now 
have added the texts for the properties to the class texts that were 
already there. See the multilinguality wiki page 
<https://www.w3.org/community/locadd/wiki/Multilinguality>.

To other Dutch speakers: could you please check if you agree with the 
texts as proposed?
To those fluent in other languages besides English or Dutch: Could you 
try to add your translations? The more the better!

As predicted, the process of translating forces some extra thought on 
the nature of the classes and properties in the vocabulary. So I had 
some questions and comments popping up:

About the comment for locn:location: "/The location property links any 
resource to the Location Class. Asserting the location relationship 
implies only that the domain has some connection to a Location in time 
or space. It does not imply that the resource is necessarily at that 
location at the time when the assertion is made/"

 1. The first part states: "/The location property links any resource to
    the Location Class./" Shouldn't it say that it links any resource to
    a Location (an instance of the Location Class)?
 2. The second part  puzzles me: "/Asserting the location relationship
    implies only that the domain has some connection to a Location in
    time or space./" Shouldn't it say 'resource' instead of 'domain'?
    And what is the meaning of the addition '..in time and space'? In my
    understanding, a location (dcterms:Location) is a purely spatial
    thing, so there is no need to add 'in space'. And I don't understand
    why time is introduced at all.
 3. And about the third part ("It does not imply that the resource is
    necessarily at that location at the time when the assertion is
    made"): Again, why the addition of time? Moreover, why the addition
    of the the time when the assertion is made? This time is the
    transaction time, the time the triple was published. This has little
    to do with the valid time of the assertion. And I also think the
    valid time can be kept out of the comment.

Of course the important thing here is: what is the comment trying to 
convey? As I understand it, it says that there is some kind of spatial 
relationship between object and subject. It does not mean that they are 
topologically equal, they could have some other topological 
relationship. Is that the correct interpretation?

About locn:geographicName:
The last part of the comment is "/For INSPIRE-conformant data, provide 
the metadata for the geographic name using a skos:Concept as a 
datatype./". I think this should be a usage note (vann:usageNote), not a 
comment.

About locn:geomerty:
The current comment is "/Associates any resource with the corresponding 
geometry/"
I think this comment is misleading, because it implies that a resource 
can have only one corresponding geometry. I think "Associates a resource 
with a geometry" is better.

About address properties like locn:address, locn:poBox, 
locn:thoroughfare,...: Comments include statements like "The domain of 
locn:poBox islocn:Address <http://www.w3.org/ns/locn#locn:Address>". Why 
does this need to be in the comment? For the expert, this is clear from 
the definitions in the vocabulary. For the non-expert this statement is 
not understandable.

About locator designator and locator name: I vaguely remember bringing 
this up earlier, but the comments speak of a locator, which is something 
undefined in the vocabulary. Because of this I am yet unable to 
translate these comments.

Greetings,
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 <http://www.geodan.nl> | disclaimer 
<http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
------------------------------------------------------------------------