Hi- I've added ISSUE 212 <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/212> to the Glossary section indicating the need to do some improvements - citing Coverage as particularly unclear and noting sources of definitions (thanks Simon). Jeremy On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 at 17:15 Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de> wrote: > On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 10:43 PM, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote: > > > I had a go at this in the recent revision of ISO 19109. Here's clause > 7.2.2. The > > first paragraph in particular might help: > > > > 7.2.2 Coverages > > > > Many aspects of the real-world may be represented as features whose > > properties are single-valued and static. These conventional features > provide a > > model of the world in terms of discrete objects located in it. However, > in some > > applications it is more useful to use a model focussing on the variation > of > > property > > values in space and time, formalized as coverages. Users of geographic > > information may utilize both viewpoints. While coverages are themselves > > strictly features as well, it is common to contrast coverages and > non-coverage > > features when discussing the functionality provided by each viewpoint. > In the > > following discussion the name ‘feature’ refers to non-coverage features. > [...] > > Thanks, Simon, yes that helps at least me. I'd be curious what an average > web developer would say, though... > > Best, > > Lars >
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2016 08:36:14 UTC