W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > July 2017

Re: Encoding geospatial features on schema.org

From: chaals is Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 10:50:47 +0200
To: public-schemaorg@w3.org
Message-ID: <f4a320fb-8903-38cf-4dcc-64bafb307efc@yandex.ru>

On 11/07/17 19:43, Joan Masů wrote:
> Iím trying to use HTML+schema.org to encode geospatial features in 
> html pages.
> Geospatial features are generally composed by one (or more) geospatial 
> attributes and one or more no geospatial attributes. For examples, the 
> Mississippi river can be represented by a linestring and the name, 
> description, length, etc.
> Schema.org, seems great for tagging no geospatial attributes. I have 
> some issues with the geospatial objects.
> I see there are two objects that I can use: GeoCoordinate and 
> GeoShape. If I need to encode a linestring for my river, I could use 
> GeoShape but I see no way to specify the projection.
This is not necessarily a *bug*. Schema.org is intended for pretty 
general use, so we have tried to keep it simple enough for people to use 
it correctly - and that in turn makes some things simplistic to the 
point where it doesn't cover all the needs of experts.

In this case, I think our underlying assumption is that we assume WGS84 
information, and recognise that this is sometimes going to be 
problematic. Given the ability to do better, I would suggest that you 
extend the data you provide with non-Schema vocabulary for processors 
which can take advantage of the higher precision about what you mean.
> With polygons features, I have even more problems because I cannot see 
> how to specify holes in them (a common requirement in land cover maps).
That does seem like a genuine bug. For example it leaves us unable 
describe Italy except by including the Vatican City and San Marino, and 
I think Schema probably should handle that use case properly.
> Do you know of any implementation of a similar thing that I can check?
> Iím missing something and shat I believe is not supported is actually 
> supported?
> Is it possible to discuss extensions of the model to better support 
> geospatial objects? Where?
Yes it is. The best approach is to raise an issue in the Github 
repository: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues


Received on Wednesday, 12 July 2017 08:51:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 12 July 2017 08:51:31 UTC