- From: Michael Andrews <nextcontent01@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 22:05:25 +0530
- To: Vicki Tardif <vtardif@google.com>
- Cc: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAF9ZrJ2jerQ9micmqcz4ntTQCDxQnboo7HAOaJqEMzGHG8t0wQ@mail.gmail.com>
Is similar to FAO's Geopolitical Ontology "has border with" property: http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles/geoinfo/geopolitical/resource/hasBorderWith On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 9:30 PM, Vicki Tardif <vtardif@google.com> wrote: > In the examples given, one is a geographic boundary (Walls of Jerusalem) > and the other is the boundary of an anatomical structure. A single property > encompassing both ideas is the sort of mid-level ontology we have not > traditionally done. > > I am not particularly against the idea, but we should be thoughtful about > heading in this direction and the oft-used example of the "Agent" type. > > - Vicki > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 10:21 AM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Touches or Within ... seem to be the closest semantically to "has >> boundry" and Wikidata's examples... yes/no ? >> >> I failed Geography in High School with an A- not an A+ :) So help here >> appreciated from anyone. >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 9:17 AM Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote: >> >>> (resending with list cc:'d. I do not know of any documented consumption >>> of these yet) >>> >>> On 23 January 2018 at 15:16, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Have a look around >>>> >>>> issue-1375 Types (1) >>>> GeospatialGeometry <http://pending.schema.org/GeospatialGeometry> >>>> issue-1375 Properties (10) >>>> geospatiallyContains <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyContains>, >>>> geospatiallyCoveredBy <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyCoveredBy> >>>> , geospatiallyCovers <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyCovers>, >>>> geospatiallyCrosses <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyCrosses>, >>>> geospatiallyDisjoint <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyDisjoint>, >>>> geospatiallyEquals <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyEquals>, >>>> geospatiallyIntersects >>>> <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyIntersects>, >>>> geospatiallyOverlaps <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyOverlaps>, >>>> geospatiallyTouches <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyTouches>, >>>> geospatiallyWithin <http://pending.schema.org/geospatiallyWithin> >>>> >>>> in http://pending.schema.org/ and http://github.com/schemaorg/sc >>>> hemaorg/issues/1375 >>>> >>>> This was in collaboration with W3C's Spatial Web WG. It is an attempt >>>> to capture a set of related distinctions, alongside >>>> http://schema.org/GeoShape and /box, and http://schema.org/GeoCircle >>>> .... >>>> >>>> On 23 January 2018 at 15:06, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "has boundry" >>>>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P4777 >>>>> the element that's on the two dimensional border that surrounds the >>>>> subject; the limit of an entity. >>>>> >>>>> Do we have something close to "has boundry" already ? >>>>> >>>>> Examples: >>>>> Old City of Jerusalem <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q213274> >>>>> has boundary <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P4777> >>>>> Walls of Jerusalem <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2918723> >>>>> >>>>> peritoneal cavity <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1030169> >>>>> has boundary <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P4777> >>>>> peritoneum <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q9629> >>>>> >>>>> <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q9629> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >
Received on Tuesday, 23 January 2018 16:35:49 UTC