- From: Peter DeVries <pete.devries@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:52:56 -0500
- To: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <AANLkTikfopzjMz2wXzMJ5+H877z4A5tGy5XkSg7s58T=@mail.gmail.com>
After reviewing the feedback I created a test vocabulary and RDF file. The test vocabulary is in it's own namespace and called dwc_area. It is here: http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ontology/dwc_area.owl The HTML Document is here http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ontology/dwc_area_doc/index.html (For some reason protege did not include the imported geo vocabulary) I also made up a small test file that uses both the new geo URI and an shows the suggested way to include a radius measure. It is here: http://lod.taxonconcept.org/rdf/area_example.rdf It should show up in Sindice soon, and already works in URIburner. (I did submit an earlier incorrect earlier version into Sindice that might still be cached) Here is what the RDF looks like in URIBurner < http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/html/http/lod.taxonconcept.org/rdf/area_example.rdf > To get to each of the three "Areas" you need to click on the links in the * topics* list ** Note that the final location of the vocabulary is unclear. It will probably end up in the DarwinCore vocabular or in my txn vocabulary.* ** It might also make sense to keep it a separate?* # Below is background info and the suggestions from the LOD community. 1) There is proposed standard that everyone should know about *A Uniform Resource Identifier for Geographic Locations ('geo' URI)* http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5870 (from Sean Gillies) * Not clear that all the systems understand this but URIburner and Virtuoso interprets these as a "URN" type thing, so they work, but are not "understood" in the way that the "geo" vocabulary is understood. Note that if and when this becomes a standard it will allow these "Areas" to be universally understood. What this means is that in the future I can markup my 10,0000 mosquito records from one location with one URN type id. 2) I got the following back from Bernard Vatan. > What about something as the following, since the radius is not really a property of the point ... * Note this differs from my final examples <dwc:Area> <geo:center> <geo:Point> <geo:lat>55.701</geo:lat> <geo:long>12.552</geo:long> </geo:Point> </geo:center> <dwc:radius>10</dwc:radius> </dwc:Area> 3) I also got this back from Paul Houle, > For Ookaboo I've worked out an internal data model for points; Ookaboo also knows about real shapes, but the fact is that most people out there will throw points at you and only know how to consume points. > Here are a few bits of extra data that are useful to add to a point > (1) provenance > (2) datum (I try to stick to WGS84, but points from freebase occasionally have a Datum attached, so I store it) > (3) circular error (the accuracy of the determination of the point, for instance the technical limitation of a GPS receiver) > (4) scale length of feature (how accurate do we have to be? it's not worth getting into an edit war over the exact point that represents, say, Finland.) > (5) an overall quality rating (so if we've got ten points we can pick the best) # I am looking forward to comments and suggestions. Respectfully, - Pete ---------------------------------------------------------------- Pete DeVries Department of Entomology University of Wisconsin - Madison 445 Russell Laboratories 1630 Linden Drive Madison, WI 53706 TaxonConcept Knowledge Base <http://www.taxonconcept.org/> / GeoSpecies Knowledge Base <http://lod.geospecies.org/> About the GeoSpecies Knowledge Base <http://about.geospecies.org/> ------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 11 October 2010 18:53:32 UTC