- From: Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 08:19:29 +0000
- To: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>, Peter Baumann <p.baumann@jacobs-university.de>
- Cc: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, Kerry Taylor <Kerry.Taylor@acm.org>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, "Frans Knibbe" <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>
+1 from me, too, also to http URIs /Lars *** Lesen. Hören. Wissen. Deutsche Nationalbibliothek *** -- Dr. Lars G. Svensson Deutsche Nationalbibliothek Informationsinfrastruktur und Bestanderhaltung Adickesallee 1 D-60322 Frankfurt am Main Telefon: +49-69-1525-1752 Telefax: +49-69-1525-1799 mailto:l.svensson@dnb.de http://www.dnb.de > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrea Perego [mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu] > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2015 9:58 AM > To: Peter Baumann > Cc: Linda van den Brink; Svensson, Lars; Kerry Taylor; public-sdw-wg@w3.org; > Frans Knibbe; Alejandro Llaves > Subject: Re: Issue-10 unresolved in meeting today > > +1 also from me. > > Moreover, I would suggest we refer explicitly to "HTTP URIs". > > Andrea > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Peter Baumann > <p.baumann@jacobs-university.de> wrote: > > +1 as it is more technically motivated. > > -Peter > > > > On 06/25/15 09:23, Linda van den Brink wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> What if we turn the phrasing around a bit. (as I suggested yesterday in the > IRC channel, but this may have been missed) > >> > >> Then, the requirement is: to be able to reference a CRS with a URI, and to > get useful information about the CRS when you dereference that URI. > >> > >> This implies a method for describing CRSs. > >> > >> I believe this phrasing is closer to Ed's point, at least as I understood it > yesterday. > >> > >> Linda > >> > >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > >> Van: Svensson, Lars [mailto:L.Svensson@dnb.de] > >> Verzonden: woensdag 24 juni 2015 18:19 > >> Aan: Kerry Taylor; public-sdw-wg@w3.org > >> CC: Frans Knibbe; Alejandro Llaves > >> Onderwerp: RE: Issue-10 unresolved in meeting today > >> > >> Kerry, > >> > >> On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 5:22 PM, Kerry Taylor wrote: > >> > >>> I wonder whether I could explain my position expressed in the meeting > >>> today better in email. To me, > >>> > >>> 1. It is a reasonable and much supported requirement that CRSs need > >>> to be described (somehow, and I leave this how open for the purpose > >>> of a requirement), and that a CRS can be referenced by a URI. Hence > Frans' > >>> proposal or something very similar works for me. That is, "There > >>> should be a best practice for publishing data about coordinate > >>> reference systems (CRS). It should be applicable to any 2D or 3D CRS, > >>> not only geographical reference systems. CRS descriptions should be > >>> referencable by HTTP URIs." > >>> We could take out the "by http URIs" I guess as that is a 'how' but > >>> that is so obvious I think it should be left in nevertheless. We could > >>> change "best practice" to "a way" or "a method" and I am just as > >>> happy. For me, "data about" does not imply rdf, nor natural language > >>> text, nor any other form of description, but if it does to others, I > >>> would be just as happy with "descriptions of" instead. > >> Works for me and I like the "descriptions of" since that is technology neutral. > The important parts are description and referencability. I see this requirement > as being related to but independent of 2. (below). > >> > >>> 2. It is not so clear, and indeed hotly disputed, about whether > >>> spatial data on the web *must* reference a CRS. It might be that some > >>> CRS is assumed by default, but not explicitly referenced. It might be > >>> that the whole idea of a CRS is too difficult for non-experts and > >>> should be assumed away. > >> Well it *is* difficult for non-experts. I was lucky to get much help and > support from some of the people on this list when I needed to understand how > all the bits and pieces (ellipsoid, datum, axis order, ...) fit together and why > they are important. OTOH I now know how important they are and given that > we are not only talking about geographic CRSs but also custom ones (my > computer is at (0,10): that is zero centimetres to the right and ten centimetres > in front of me) at least in some cases the CRS must be specified for the data to > make sense (or at least be interpreted properly). > >> > >>> Number 1 above stands nevertheless > >>> for at least those cases where a CRS *is* desired. And we now have a > >>> separate requirement to discuss about whether it should be possible to > >>> implicitly refer to a default CRS ( issue-28). > >>> > >>> My own opinion on 2 above, developed by watching the comments on this > >>> list and at Barcelona, is that we should try to make explicitly > >>> referencing a CRS both trivially easy and mandatory, so that it is > >>> explicit even if a beginner does not realise that it is there. This > >>> way we take advantage of the cultural copy- and-paste practice yet > >>> enable that culture to vary over time and space and application > >>> domain, ie getting it right most of the time for both publishers and > consumers without even thinking about it. > >> Mandating an explicit reference does have the advantage that your data is > not misinterpreted just because you omit the CRS (for whatever reason) and > the consuming application reverts to the default CRS. This is a Good Thing > (TM). OTOH it then really needs to be "trivially easy" to make that explicit and > that might be really hard to achieve since you need to understand what a CRS is > before you can specify which one you use (see above). > >> > >>> Chris raised an interesting idea about using content negotiation to > >>> request a particular crs and getting whatever is asked for dynamically > >>> ( I think that is what he meant). This sounds attractive to me ( but, > >>> not to get distracted, is in solution space, not requirement space, I > >>> think) and I would want to know that this is not going to be too much > >>> of a challenge for data publishers. But that is a topic for another day. > >> What would the requirement be? > >>> Do you think we can resolve issue-10 next week? > >> We SHOULD try! > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Lars > > > > -- > > Dr. Peter Baumann > > - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen > > www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann > > mail: p.baumann@jacobs-university.de > > tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178 > > - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793) > > www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann@rasdaman.com > > tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882 > > "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) > > > > > > > > > > -- > Andrea Perego, Ph.D. > Scientific / Technical Project Officer > European Commission DG JRC > Institute for Environment & Sustainability > Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data > Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262 > 21027 Ispra VA, Italy > > https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/ > > ---- > The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may > not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official > position of the European Commission.
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2015 08:20:05 UTC