Comment on the SOSA ontology

Dear all,

I am a user of the SSN ontology as well. I think its transformation is
for the best, especially regarding the simplification of its core, its
effective modularization, and the integration of the notion of Actuator
and Action.

I second Catherine : the use of comprehensive examples are crucial to
the proper reuse of a vocabulary, and that maybe the example
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/documentation_examples/sosa-core_examples.ttl
could be declined in an example demonstrating the use of ssn as well,
with the description of some SystemCapability for instance, as well as
the integration of results with qudt:Unit and such.

Moreover, as Mr. Rodriguez pointed out, I proposed an ontology, SAN [1],
as a mirror to SSN for actuation and actuators. It is dependant on DUL
as well, but I'll soon release an updated version aligned with SOSA.
However, I would also like to know if ontology design patterns were
integrated into SOSA, and if they could be explicitely represented in a
separated module if so, as I did for AAE, presented in [2] (open access
publication). It would ease their reusability.

Globally, speaking as the developer of applications based on the
ontology, I'm really happy about the new version of sosa and ssn.

Sincerely yours, and thank you for your feedbacks,

Nicolas Seydoux

[1] https://www.irit.fr/recherches/MELODI/ontologies/SAN

[2] https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01467853v1

-- 
Nicolas Seydoux, IRIT/LAAS-CNRS
PhD student - Semantic web and IoT
IRIT : MELODI team - Semantic web and ontologies
LAAS : SARA team - Advanced networks and IoT
Tel : +33(0)5 61 33 69 07