Re: UCR isssue: Is provenance in scope? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Kerry,

I’ll see what I can add this evening. Unfortunately more regrets for the meeting today (entered on the wiki this time). I’m in a research consortium meeting this morning.

I think that extensions of PROV-O to cover deriving a “new” feature by linking to an existing / authoritative feature and/or geometry could be in scope for Best Practice, but we’ll see how well it fits.

-Josh

Joshua Lieberman, Ph.D.
Principal
Tumbling Walls
jlieberman*tumblingwalls.com
+1 617 431 6431

> On May 20, 2015, at 7:41 AM, <Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au> <Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au> wrote:
> 
> Hi Bruce, Josh,
>  
> I, for one would love to see that use case! I will do what I can to hold the presses for you – can you get it on the wiki in the next 24 hours?https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Working_Use_Cases <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Working_Use_Cases>    And also do the analysis of requirements in the spreadsheethttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PSnpJYQDgsdgZgPJEfUU0EhVfgFFYGc1WL4xUX9Dunk/edit?usp=sharing <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PSnpJYQDgsdgZgPJEfUU0EhVfgFFYGc1WL4xUX9Dunk/edit?usp=sharing>
>  
> I have done a lot of work on provenance in the context of Bioregional assessments and other things with GA.
> I also was part of that work in publishing BoM’s  ACORN-SAT  as linked data --  and it would have been lovely to do that with provenance too.
>  
> However, I do not think we are going to be “doing”  provenance in this group, I would just like to know that what we are doing neatly docks to PROV-O (the W3C prov ontology),
> and I know that  will not be the case unless we make it so.  See for example http://knoesis.org/ssn2014/paper_9.pdf <http://knoesis.org/ssn2014/paper_9.pdf>. It would be great, too, if  Josh is watching out for
> “reference provenance of spatial data must address not only how a feature and a spatial such as a geometry were formed, but how they were associated and under what assumptions for representation of the physical world.”
> so that we can have some confidence that it will be possible to represent this--- but I still don’t see the doing of that as in scope (wrt our  charter). We should consider it for future work, which we can certainly recommend coming out of this group.
> Can I suggest that you, Josh, note it on the relevant “wish list” on the main page of the wiki, so it does not get forgotten? Or, put it as an “issue” on the tracker to ensure it gets more attention if you prefer. We can put it on a meeting agenda, but can it wait for the UCR to stabilise first?
>  
> Didn’t  I meet you, Bruce,  in the Melbourne office  earlier this year? If  you are in Canberra some time it would be nice to catch up on these matters.
>  
> Kerry
>  
> From: Bruce Bannerman [mailto:B.Bannerman@bom.gov.au <mailto:B.Bannerman@bom.gov.au>] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 19 May 2015 8:58 AM
> To: Taylor, Kerry (Digital, Acton); jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com <mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
> Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: UCR isssue: Is provenance in scope? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>  
> Hi Kerry,
>  
> Provenance is particularly important for climate data related issues, and no doubt for many more domains as well.
>  
> From a climate perspective, when I publish a scientific paper, I need to be able to reference all the data that underpins the analysis that the paper was based on. So this may be:
> Published paper
> Claims in Published paper based on Analytical Data (perhaps a multi dimensional array/grid/coverage)
> Analytical data is derived from quality assured observations data (with details as to why each change to the QA obs were made)
> Quality assured observations data is derived from ‘raw’ observations data which has details as to the conditions, sensors etc that the observation was made under.
> There are many nuances to provenance here. Including an understanding of what algorithms were used to process the data and ideally a reference to the source code of these algorithms as they were at the time of the analysis.
>  
> And to make things more interesting, the analysis and data is typically time-series (observations and coverages).
>  
>  
>  
> This reminds me I posted on a potential climate use case several months ago, but forgot to add it.
>  
> If there is still interest in this, let me know and I’ll put something together.
>  
> Bruce
>  
>  
> From: "Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au <mailto:Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au>" <Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au <mailto:Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au>>
> Date: Wednesday, 13 May 2015 23:59
> To: "jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com <mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>" <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com <mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>>
> Cc: "public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
> Subject: RE: UCR isssue: Is provenance in scope?
> Resent-From: <public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Thursday, 14 May 2015 00:00
>  
> (Resending –missed the list cc)
>  
> From: Taylor, Kerry (Digital, Acton) 
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2015 10:53 PM
> To: 'Joshua Lieberman'
> Subject: RE: UCR isssue: Is provenance in scope?
>  
> +1
> I think we need only to make sure (and perhaps show how) our deliverables can deal with provenance by attaching/linking  some W3C Prov-o. I would not suggest we need to show to encode spatial data provenance in PROv-o  though.
> Provenance is a first class issue in a great deal of spatial data applications.
>  
> Kerry
>  
> From: Joshua Lieberman [mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com <mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2015 10:38 PM
> To: Frans Knibbe
> Cc: SDW WG Public List
> Subject: Re: UCR isssue: Is provenance in scope?
>  
> Perhaps we can discuss the general issue of scope today on the call. There are many aspects of spatiotemporal data that in general are similar to issues with other data, but that clearly require specialization for our case. For example, reference provenance of spatial data must address not only how a feature and a spatial such as a geometry were formed, but how they were associated and under what assumptions for representation of the physical world. This is quite specialized to spatial and a significant semantic interoperability issue. We will miss addressing critical points in our work if we subsume them too often into general ones and deem them out of scope.
>  
> Josh
>  
> Joshua Lieberman, Ph.D.
> Principal
> Tumbling Walls
> jlieberman*tumblingwalls.com <http://tumblingwalls.com/>
> +1 617 431 6431
>  
> On May 13, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl <mailto:frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>> wrote:
>  
> Hello all,
>  
> I have raised an issue for the UCR document: ISSUE-11 <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/11>.
> Again, all help in getting this issue resolved is very welcome.
>  
> Regards,
> Frans
>  
> -- 
> 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>