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

Re: Requirements from UC-19

From: Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 11:36:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CABTzy2Q=bGXcLbXzP+rfHPzB6b4YfAcs9BrxP0bizmYcG2U5-g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de>
Cc: "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Hi Lars,

I have checked the requested existing requirements in the spreadsheet for
your use case Publishing cultural heritage data
The new requirement you suggested for Coverage is related to representing
uncertain spatio-temporal data. This is partially covered in the Time
deliverable ("It must be possible to describe time points and intervals in
a vague, imprecise manner", tab Time, column C). For the spatial
uncertainty, I am wondering if you have cases of uncertain/fuzzy coverage
data or the problem is just on referencing vague locations in space. In
case of the latter, this could be covered with the requirement at tab
Coverage, column M. Otherwise, we can discuss whether a new requirement is

Best regards,

On 29 April 2015 at 23:05, Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>

> Hi, Frans.
> > [snip]
> >
> > As for time, I do not yet see a requirement like the Spatial Metadata
> > requirement for temporal data, but I think there could be. I can think of
> > temporal extent, temporal resolution and temporal reference systems.
> Well,
> > the temporal reference system is a separate requirement in the
> spreadsheet
> > (column H).
> Just to note that we do have a metadata-related use case including
> temporal resolution and temporal reference systems in the
> requirements. It's the in Section 4.42:
> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#h-geospatialextensionstodomainindependentmetadataschemas
> The requirements are listed in the UC description.
> BTW, these are still open issues in the work on GeoDCAT-AP described
> by the UC. The GeoDCAT-AP WG is currently maintaining an XSLT to
> transform ISO 19139 metadata records into RDF, and mappings for the
> metadata elements under discussion are still missing (along with the
> one concerning CRSs):
> https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/CITnet/stash/projects/ODCKAN/repos/iso-19139-to-dcat-ap/
> >From what reported by members of the GeoDCAT-AP WG, it is apparent
> that many organisations dealing with spatial data and their
> publication on cross-domain data catalogues are using provisional
> approaches to deal with this problem, while waiting for the
> publication of best practices.
> Cheers,
> Andrea

Alejandro Llaves

Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)

Artificial Intelligence Department

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Avda. Montepríncipe s/n

Boadilla del Monte, 28660 Madrid, Spain


Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2015 09:37:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:16 UTC