Re: LOCN and DGGS

FWIW ...

In the US Presidential Election all the "experts" blew it.  On November 8th - 9th almost all failed to track the results of the race (as in "race condition") properly. The official roll call will not actually be held until early January, but the end result is already determined.

As it happens, people in North America have been at this "geographic identifier" thing a very long time ...
By 1754 Ben Franklin was using the same acronyms for geographic areas (Postal Codes) still in use today. (http://www.rustprivacy.org/2016/stratml/franklin/).

It is important to realize that the "database" of Postal Codes had already been initialized by 1754 and contained four members.  There was no "Colony Zero" for Epidemiologists or Twitter to discover.  Since then database operations have been INSERTs.

The US Federal Constitution was adopted with the same "short stop" strategy in 1789. Only the original 13 Colonies were allowed to vote and the measure was deemed binding when approved by 9.  Eventually all 13 approved.  In data processing terms this amounted to a re-serialization of the roll call - the first to approve (Delaware) and the last to approve (Rhode Island) were peers.  The roll call order changed as well because Connecticut comes before Delaware in alphabetical order.  Apparently Delaware's early adoption and Rhode Island's dismal performance both had the "right to be forgotten". 

For the 2016 Election, the popular vote was manifest and folded into the Electoral College ceremonial which will take place in early January.

http://www.rustprivacy.org/2016/stratml/franklin/GU-Election-Map.html (Area Maps)
http://www.rustprivacy.org/2016/stratml/franklin/GU-Election-Encode.html (Subdivision Names)

  
--Gannon

--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 11/18/16, Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: LOCN and DGGS
 To: "Frans Knibbe" <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, "public-locadd@w3.org Mailing list" <public-locadd@w3.org>
 Date: Friday, November 18, 2016, 11:42 AM
 
 Hi, Frans.
 
 Just for our records: The
 notion of "geographic identifier" and the use 
 of rdfs:seeAlso in LOCN was thoroughly
 discussed back in 2014, in a long 
 thread -
 starting at [1] and continuing at [2]. Basically, the point
 is 
 that "geographic identifier"
 is meant to model alternative / secondary 
 identifiers for a spatial thing, that are
 preferably specified with HTTP 
 URIs - for a
 more detailed explanation, see [1] and then [3].
 
 Coming to the issue you raise,
 Frans, I see it as a more general one on 
 how identifiers (not only geo ones) are
 modelled in the RDF world.
 
 As far as I know, there is currently no
 consistent practice. One of the 
 solutions
 is to define specific properties - as in Schema.org, or
 PRISM 
 and the Bibo ontology in the
 publishing domain. On the other hand, ADMS 
 provides a more generic approach via
 adms:identifier / adms:Identifier.
 
 IMHO, the point is what you want to use the
 identifier for. For 
 instance, if I use DGGS
 just for specifying the location of a resource 
 you can use it with locn:location /
 rdfs:seeAlso. Another case is 
 whether, you
 want to know the identifier "type" - e.g., for a
 
 publication, I may need to know which is
 the DOI, ISBN, etc.
 
 Andrea
 
 ----
 [1]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-locadd/2013Dec/0043.html
 [2]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-locadd/2014Jan/0008.html
 [1]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-locadd/2014Jan/0076.html
 
 
 On 18/11/2016
 17:09, Frans Knibbe wrote:
 > Hello,
 >
 > A while ago we had a
 thread about Open Location Code
 > <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-locadd/2015Aug/0000.html>,
 > which is an example of a Discrete Global
 Grid System (DGGS)
 > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrete_Global_Grid>.
 There is an OGC
 > Standards Working Group
 dedicated to the topic, the DGGS SWG
 >
 <http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/groups/dggsswg>.
 >
 > I wonder if the
 Location Core Vocabulary is already equipped to work
 > with DGGS references. It is imaginable
 that people will want to use a
 > DGGS
 code to identify a location, perhaps as the only way to
 locate a
 > thing on Earth. Could such a
 code be expressed with LOCN?
 >
 > The most appropriate property for doing
 that seems to be the geographic
 >
 identifier <https://www.w3.org/ns/locn#rdfs:seeAlso>,
 for which
 > rdfs:seeAlso is taken to be
 the appropriate term. So would rdfs:seeAlso
 > be a good way to refer to a DGGS location?
 Two questions come to mind:
 >
 >  1. I have not studied all DGGS, but in
 the general case I think a DGGS
 > 
    reference consists of a code and an indication
 of a DGGS scheme,
 >     which
 is needed to decipher the code. Does that mean a DGGS
 >     reference needs two
 semantic elements? Or is it all right to assume
 >     that all DGGS references
 can always be expressed as a single URI
 >     (e.g. https://map.what3words.com/monorail.section.trespass
 >     <https://map.what3words.com/monorail.section.trespass>)?
 >  2. Will it be obvious to agents looking
 voor location data that
 > 
    rdf:seeAlso can be used for an indication of
 location? I mean,
 > 
    rdfs:seeAlso is also used for other types of
 relations (I realise
 > 
    that this is actually not only about DGGS, but
 about the
 > 
    discoverability of location information in
 general, where an
 > 
    unspecific term like rdfs:seeAlso is used).
 >
 > So what do you
 think?
 >
 >
 Greetings,
 > Frans
 >
 >
 
 -- 
 Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
 Scientific / Technical Project Officer
 European Commission DG JRC
 Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
 Unit B6 - Digital Economy
 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 Friday, 18 November 2016 20:14:56 UTC