W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > June 2015

RE: The model reuse requirement

From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 15:37:30 +0000
To: <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, <allaves@fi.upm.es>
CC: <p.baumann@jacobs-university.de>
Message-ID: <2A7346E8D9F62D4CA8D78387173A054A6020F016@exmbx04-cdc.nexus.csiro.au>
ISSUE-18: Model Reuse

Frans has asked

   - Do you think [http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#ModelReuse] could actually be the same requirement as the
Compatibility with existing practices
   <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#Compatibility>
   requirement?

Looking at how the two requirements are currently cast

Compatibility with existing practices

Standards for spatial data on the Web should be compatible with existing methods of making spatial data available (like WFS, WMS, CSW, WCS).

appears to refer to compatibility at the protocol level, while

Model reuse

Spatial data modeling issues solved in existing models shall be considered for adoption, e.g. O&M or SoilML.

appears to concern data models (semantics).



These are fairly separate concerns. Complete interoperability requires both, but my hunch is that the second is a much more desirable goal than the first. Semantics is longer lasting than architectural styles.


Simon Cox | Research Scientist
CSIRO Land and Water
PO Box 56, Highett Vic 3190, Australia
Tel +61 3 9252 6342<tel:%2B61%203%209252%206342> | Mob +61 403 302 672<tel:%2B61%20403%20302%20672>
simon.cox@csiro.au<https://vic.owa.csiro.au/owa/redir.aspx?C=Y8HMKTuUBkmbM97NjtDx5lGOnwxj1c9IdyRdGXbcQ8yykNtSsGHlgXUbOJN1bdSmnc9NFxd8E0M.&URL=mailto%3asimon.cox%40csiro.au> | http://people.csiro.au/C/S/Simon-Cox

________________________________
From: Frans Knibbe [frans.knibbe@geodan.nl]
Sent: Saturday, 6 June 2015 12:23 AM
To: SDW WG Public List; Alejandro Llaves
Cc: Cox, Simon (L&W, Highett); Peter Baumann
Subject: Re: The model reuse requirement

Hello,

I think this issue still needs some thought. If it is only about not reinventing the wheel, then I think the requirement is too general to be in scope (note that it is already in the list of BP Principles<https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Principles>). On the other hand, if there are specific requirements to be made for development of ontologies for sensors or coverages, I think we could have the requirement in the UCR document. But ISO 19123, the Data Cube vocabulary and WaterML Part 1 - Timeseries are already mentioned in the description of the deliverable in the charter<http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/charter#cov>. I don't think we need to repeat that in a requirement.

Anyway, since this issue is not resolved yet I have created an issue in the tracker: ISSUE-18<https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/18>, and I have linked the requirement to the issue in the UCR document.

Regards,
Frans

2015-06-05 2:09 GMT+02:00 Peter Baumann <p.baumann@jacobs-university.de<mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de>>:
almost correct.

The OGC Coverages Model supports:
- grids
    non-referenced (ie, no coordinates)
    regular grids (eg, ortho images)
    irregular grids (currently being generalized as an outcome of OGC Testbed-11, also towards sensor models)
- so-called discrete coverages (sorry, this naming comes from ISO 19123):
    point clouds
    trajectory sets
    surface sets
    solid sets
...and all of that in n dimensions, including space & time.

Coming back to grids, coverages are successfully being used for 2D imagery, 3D x/y/t image timeseries (!) and x/y/z geophysical voxel models, 4D x/y/z/t climate data.

Sequences of (timestamp,image) pairs have been standardized in EO-WCS (WCS for Earth Observation data, ie: remote sensing imagery), further work on this is under way (because we also want good functional support, right?).

Bottom line, OGC's coverages are certainly not the end of the story (is there one in IT world?), but represent the currently most comprehensive treatment of the subject.

cheers,
Peter



On 06/05/15 01:37, Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:

However, we also need to be careful to fully understand the scope of the components that we reuse.



For example, the OGC Coverages model that Peter refers to relates particularly to gridded coverages (imagery). It does not support some other important coverage-types and common representations. For example, a Time-series is a coverage (it is the variation of a property along one spatio-temporal axis). In environmental monitoring applications it is usually represented as a stream of interleaved position(i.e. time)-value(,value(,value...)) objects. This is not compatible with the current OGC Coverages standard. So while OGC Coverages provides a good solution for grids, it doesn't cover the whole space.


Simon Cox | Research Scientist
CSIRO Land and Water
PO Box 56, Highett Vic 3190, Australia
Tel +61 3 9252 6342<tel:%2B61%203%209252%206342> | Mob +61 403 302 672<tel:%2B61%20403%20302%20672>
simon.cox@csiro.au<https://vic.owa.csiro.au/owa/redir.aspx?C=Y8HMKTuUBkmbM97NjtDx5lGOnwxj1c9IdyRdGXbcQ8yykNtSsGHlgXUbOJN1bdSmnc9NFxd8E0M.&URL=mailto%3asimon.cox%40csiro.au> | http://people.csiro.au/C/S/Simon-Cox
<http://people.csiro.au/C/S/Simon-Cox>
<http://people.csiro.au/C/S/Simon-Cox>

________________________________
From: Peter Baumann [p.baumann@jacobs-university.de<mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de>]
Sent: Friday, 29 May 2015 11:39 PM
To: Frans Knibbe; Alejandro Llaves
Cc: SDW WG Public List
Subject: Re: The model reuse requirement

Frans,

me again;
not sure that we should mention some particular model; if so we might be more comprehensive - at least, as coverages are in focus, the OGC coverage model should be referenced: OGC document 09-146r2, link: https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=48553 available from this page: http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/wcs .

-Peter


On 05/29/15 14:24, Frans Knibbe wrote:
Hello Alejandro,

I think the model reuse requirement<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#ModelReuse> could do with some clarification. Currently it reads "Spatial data modelling issues solved in existing models shall be considered for adoption, e.g. O&M or SoilML".


  *   What kind of spatial data modelling issues are solved in existing models? Is it possible to give an example?
  *   Could references to O&M and SoilML be added?
  *   Do you think this could actually be the same requirement as the Compatibility with existing practices<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#Compatibility> requirement?

Regards,
Frans

--
Frans Knibbe
Geodan
President Kennedylaan 1
1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)

T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347<tel:%2B31%20%280%2920%20-%205711%20347>
E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl<mailto:frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
www.geodan.nl<http://www.geodan.nl>
disclaimer<http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>



--
Dr. Peter Baumann
 - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
   www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann<http://www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann>
   mail: p.baumann@jacobs-university.de<mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de>
   tel: +49-421-200-3178<tel:%2B49-421-200-3178>, fax: +49-421-200-493178<tel:%2B49-421-200-493178>
 - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
   www.rasdaman.com<http://www.rasdaman.com>, mail: baumann@rasdaman.com<mailto:baumann@rasdaman.com>
   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882<tel:%2B49-173-5837882>
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)





--
Dr. Peter Baumann
 - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
   www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann<http://www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann>
   mail: p.baumann@jacobs-university.de<mailto:p.baumann@jacobs-university.de>
   tel: +49-421-200-3178<tel:%2B49-421-200-3178>, fax: +49-421-200-493178<tel:%2B49-421-200-493178>
 - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
   www.rasdaman.com<http://www.rasdaman.com>, mail: baumann@rasdaman.com<mailto:baumann@rasdaman.com>
   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882<tel:%2B49-173-5837882>
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)






--
Frans Knibbe
Geodan
President Kennedylaan 1
1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)

T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347
E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl<mailto:frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
www.geodan.nl<http://www.geodan.nl>
disclaimer<http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
Received on Friday, 5 June 2015 15:38:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:17 UTC