RE: Time Ontology outstanding Issue 1 [and 2]

Yes – Issue 1 is effectively overridden by Issue 2, which is more specific. Close issue 1 and note that the most important consequences are described in Issue 2.

Simon

From: Little, Chris [mailto:chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk]
Sent: Friday, 16 December, 2016 22:32
To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org; sdwwg@lists.opengeospatial.org
Subject: RE: Time Ontology outstanding Issue 1 [and 2]

Simon, et al.,

How about leaving most of the text of Issue 2 in the document at Section 2 as it  explains the issue well (pasted below).

Could we then list the places in the ontology that need to be changed/overridden and leave the ontology as is? Section 2 is probably not the correct place for the list but perhaps a list in Annex A?

Chris

----------------
Section 2 Changes from previous versions
Issue 2 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/65

The Time ontology is concerned only with formalizing temporal intervals and instants, and does not include any predicates to tie temporal objects to spatial entities or features, or other things. The editors note that predicates that concern temporal behaviour and properties will usually be part of an application or associated with a community of practice. Nevertheless, there may be some generic predicates that could be conveniently provided as part of the generic time ontology. Some may already exist in the ontology (before, after, hasEnd, hasBeginning) but their rdfs:domain is :TemporalEntity, so this would need to be generalized to avoid inappropriate entailments. Else predicates with similar names could be provided for linking to other entities.
 ----------------
From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au> [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2016 10:30 AM
To: Little, Chris; public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>; sdwwg@lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:sdwwg@lists.opengeospatial.org>
Subject: RE: Time Ontology outstanding Issue 1

It is a potential resolution of Issue 2.
Issue 2 – people would like some standard predicates to link from anything to temporal objects
Issue 1 – specifying domains on the predicates in the OWL-Time ontology prevents their use more generally.

It really is an open issue. Probably the hardest one left in the OWL-Time revision.

Simon

From: Little, Chris [mailto:chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk]
Sent: Friday, 16 December, 2016 21:23
To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>; sdwwg@lists.opengeospatial.org<mailto:sdwwg@lists.opengeospatial.org>
Subject: Time Ontology outstanding Issue 1

Dear All,

Here is an issue in the latest draft of the Time Ontology http://w3c.github.io/sdw/time/ for discussion and resolution.
----------------
Section 2 Changes from previous versions
Issue 1 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/64

Most of the properties defined in the original ontology have global constraints on the domain and range. If the rdfs:domain were left unspecified, the properties could be used more widely without undesirable entailments. Their use in the context of the classes in the ontology is adequately controlled through guarded restrictions (local cardinality constraints)
----------------

I have probably misunderstood, but is this something that has already been done to the revised ontology at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/sdw/gh-pages/time/rdf/time.ttl or something that is proposed?

If not yet done, is it a proposal to remove the definition:

rdfs:domain [

      rdf:type owl:Class ;

      owl:unionOf (

          :GeneralDateTimeDescription

          :Duration

        ) ;

    ] ;


?

Or is this a proposal to remove all definitions of rdfs:domain in the ontology? That is, all the statements like:
rdfs:domain :TemporalEntity ;

rdfs:domain :GeneralDateTimeDescription ;

rdfs:domain :DateTimeInterval ;

rdfs:domain :Instant ;

rdfs:domain :ProperInterval ;

rdfs:domain :GeneralDurationDescription ;

rdfs:domain :TimePosition ;

rdfs:domain :Duration ;



Chris

Chris Little
Co-Chair, OGC Meteorology & Oceanography Domain Working Group

IT Fellow - Operational Infrastructures
Met Office  FitzRoy Road  Exeter  Devon  EX1 3PB  United Kingdom
Tel: +44(0)1392 886278  Fax: +44(0)1392 885681  Mobile: +44(0)7753 880514
E-mail: chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk<mailto:chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>  http://www.metoffice.gov.uk


I am normally at work Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday each week