Re: Usage of the SSN ontology

Hi Raúl,

Thanks a lot for the very detailed implementation report! I have raised it today in the meeting and asked people who have implementations of SSN or ontologies using/extending SSN adding them to the page you created.

Apologies, we also assigned you an Action item https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/228 in your absence (which is arguably bad form!) to send around a general request for implementation evidence.

For now, we should try to include this first implementation evidence report in the next WD, or at least link it from the WD.

Thanks,
Armin

On 6/12/16, 7:05 am, "Raúl García Castro" <rgarcia@fi.upm.es> wrote:

    Dear all,
    
    During the last days, with the help of my colleague Nandana, we've been 
    trying to identify the existing places where the SSN ontology has been 
    reused.
    
    We've focused on the usage of the SSN ontology (of the SSN vocabulary 
    terms, specifically) in existing ontology and dataset catalogues.
    
    We have automatically analysed the datasets included in LOD Laundromat, 
    LOD Cloud Cache, and LODStats (even if they share plenty of datasets, 
    there are some that are different). Regarding the ontologies, we have 
    analysed those in the LOV ontology catalogue.
    
    I have included a draft with the analysis in the github repository (I 
    didn't know where to put it and we wanted to have HTML to generate 
    easily the tables):
    https://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn-usage/

    
    Before the pull request is accepted, you can check it here:
    https://rgcmme.github.io/sdw/ssn-usage/

    
    The main conclusion of the analysis is that the coverage of the SSN 
    terms is quite low in the analysed datasets and ontologies (we only 
    found 2 datasets and 9 ontologies).
    
    This is logical, since datasets using the SSN ontology may not be openly 
    published in the Web, may be part of streams of data that are not 
    persisted, may be used internally in data processing infrastructures, etc.
    
    Therefore, we are thinking on a second stage in the analysis in which we 
    ask for ontologies and datasets that reuse the SSN ontology in an open call.
    
    If we have access to the dataset/ontology, we can automate the analysis 
    (i.e., generate the tables); if not, people should fill the table for 
    the dataset/ontology.
    
    However, before progressing further on this, I'd like to hear the 
    opinions from the group.
    
    Furthermore, note that even if this may be related to the implementation 
    report (ACTION-213), with this approach we will be obtaining the 
    implementation report for SSN 1.0, but not for SSN 2.0 (if we have 
    equivalence mappings between terms in 1.0 and 2.0, we could generate the 
    report for those equivalent terms).
    
    Besides, the analysis could not result in a full coverage of the SSN 
    vocabulary terms (i.e., it may happen that there are terms that have 
    been used once or no used at all).
    
    Kind regards,
    
    -- 
    
    Dr. Raúl García Castro
    http://www.garcia-castro.com/

    
    Ontology Engineering Group
    Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
    Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Informáticos
    Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
    Campus de Montegancedo, s/n - Boadilla del Monte - 28660 Madrid
    Phone: +34 91 336 65 96 - Fax: +34 91 352 48 19

Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2016 05:21:20 UTC