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

Re: Working list of BP requirements identified during the SDW WG f2f

From: Frans Knibbe | Geodan <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 21:12:34 +0100
Message-ID: <55088AB2.9070305@geodan.nl>
To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
On 2015-03-17 14:49, Joshua Lieberman wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> But more importantly, I think we will have to decide not to view a 
>> requirement like 'there should be a best practice for minting URIs of 
>> spatial phenomena' as something we should busy ourselves with. I can 
>> think of no reason to see the URI minting problem as something that 
>> is inherently spatial, temporal or spatiotemporal. Besides that, 
>> there already are some good guidelines on minting URIs out there.
>
> It isnít necessarily a critical for a useful URI, but space-time is a 
> domain and that suggests some value in organizing the URIís that 
> explicitly reference features in it. Otherwise multiple unrelated 
> URIís are created that resolve to the same location or feature with 
> resultant overhead to assert their relationships. This is especially 
> related to the use case for authoritative framework data.
I am not sure I understand what you mean. Could you please give an 
example (real or imaginary)?

>
>>
>>> 1.8 The OGC URI scheme includes common CRS. Tryhttp://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/4326  for example. I trust that one of the OGC people in the meeting mentioned this?
>>
>> I am fairly sure that this was mentioned, and if not it is good to 
>> see it mentioned here. Two things came up that indicate that we might 
>> want to go a step further: Firstly, the OGC reference systems do have 
>> URIs, but they are not dereferencable to data describing the 
>> reference systems. Secondly, it would be good to have some best 
>> practice for the description of reference systems in general, not 
>> just earth-based reference systems.
>
> Did you try clicking on the link above? It goes to an (XML) document 
> defining the CRS.
No, I did not click the link. Sorry. But I did now. If I recall 
correctly, a while ago the link did not return data. But now it does. It 
is good to see this kind of progress!

>
>>
>> I noticed an interesting parallel for time and space there: In both 
>> cases the regular reference systems are fairly well covered by 
>> standards (earth based reference systems for space, Gregorian 
>> calendar for time), but less common reference systems are not easy to 
>> use in a standardized way.
>
> Generally the ďless commonĒ ones are complicated because they cover a 
> wide range of complicated situations, such as the SEDRIS SRM (
>
> ISO/IEC 18026:2006). They are standardized, but used mostly when they 
> canít be avoided.
>

There are reference systems that are simple (such as 2D cartesian), but 
are uncommon because of an uncommon (unique) point of origin. For 
example, I could state that I see a White-rumped sandpiper at ten 
o'clock (in which case my present position and orientation is the 
origin). Or I could say that Ed's keys are in his bedroom. Also a 
Building Information Model (BIM) could have simple but unique reference 
system because it has its own point of origin (the corner of a 
particular land parcel for example).

I think that in the domain of time similar (simple but in some way 
unique) reference systems can be used. I understand that it is a common 
practice to date archaeological finds in Egypt using the list of kings. 
That list by itself is simple, it is a list of king names (the related 
Gregorian dates could change as scientific knowledge progresses). But a 
find somewhere in the middle east could be dated by another king list 
(Sumerian kings, Assyrian kings,....).

Greetings,
Frans

>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Frans
>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andrea Perego [mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu]
>>> Sent: Monday, 16 March 2015 5:03 PM
>>> To: SDW WG
>>> Subject: Working list of BP requirements identified during the SDW WG f2f
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I've extracted from the minutes of the BP deliverable group a preliminary list of requirements, concerning the discussed use cases (1-24).
>>>
>>> You can find it on the wiki:
>>>
>>> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Requirements
>>>
>>> Please have a look, and modify / extend it as you see fit.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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 Tuesday, 17 March 2015 20:13:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:15 UTC