Re: Represent spatial data as Linked Data & easy to consume in the web stack

> Yes, it doesn't make sense to represent the individual coordinate 
> numbers in RDF.

And it also does not scale, e.g., if you would like to run a SPARQL 
endpoint.


On 02/09/2016 02:33 AM, bergi wrote:
> Thanks for the link. I will have a closer look at it later.
>
> Yes, it doesn't make sense to represent the individual coordinate 
> numbers in RDF. Using the @geometry property to map the geometry into 
> a literal like WKT or a stringified GeoJSON should be GeoSPARQL 
> compatible.
>
> Best,
> bergi
>
> On 08.02.2016 15:56, Joshua Lieberman wrote:
>> You might take a look at the report here
>> <https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=64595> by Joan
>> Maso. It seems the basic problem is that taking the JSON structure of
>> GeoJSON and translating it directly into JSON-LD and hence into RDF
>> leads to the same problem that GeoSPARQL dealt with — that representing
>> individual coordinate numbers in RDF doesn’t make much sense. Much more
>> sensible to keep the coordinate data in a literal such as WKT, which is
>> the GeoSPARQL approach and also the one that Joan came up with.
>>
>> Josh
>>
>>> On Feb 8, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Maik Riechert <m.riechert@reading.ac.uk
>>> <mailto:m.riechert@reading.ac.uk>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok that makes more sense, but I still don't understand how the
>>> "@geometry" thing is supposed to work. It's again a custom solution
>>> that would have to be supported by implementations, right? But I guess
>>> that's the point you're making, namely that linked data should be
>>> added to GeoJSON in a defined and constrained way and that a GeoJSON
>>> document should not be forced to suddenly become a full JSON-LD
>>> document. It will be hard to convince everyone that "properties" is
>>> the right container for all linked data, but the more ideas the better.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Maik
>>>
>>> On 08/02/2016 13:36, bergi wrote:
>>>> Hi Maik,
>>>>
>>>> The Leaflet example uses the proposed GeoJSON structure:
>>>>
>>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zazukoians/geojson-ld/gh-pages/us-states.json 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The info box up right shows the N-Triples of the current state, but
>>>> the example contains only data for Alabama.
>>>>
>>>> But you are right, I should add this to the description page. I was a
>>>> little bit in a hurry, to publish this document in time for the group
>>>> meeting.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> bergi
>>>>
>>>> On 08.02.2016 13:35, Maik Riechert wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't really understand what you're doing there. I think it 
>>>>> would help
>>>>> if you could add some actual GeoJSON examples in your description 
>>>>> page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Maik
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We are currently looking for ways to represent spatial data as 
>>>>>> Linked
>>>>>> Data and at the same time make sure that it's easy to consume in
>>>>>> the web
>>>>>> stack. After some discussions I've come up with a proposal to embed
>>>>>> JSON-LD in GeoJSON and vice versa.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seehttp://zazukoians.github.io/geojson-ld/  for description and 
>>>>>> example
>>>>>> code. If you have any comments post it here or create an issue on
>>>>>> Github:https://github.com/zazukoians/geojson-ld
>>>>>> <http://github.com/zazukoians/geojson-ld>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> bergi
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
Krzysztof Janowicz

Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060

Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net

Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2016 15:20:44 UTC