Re: Agenda for Best Practice sub-group, 14:00UTC 1-June-2016

it all depends what you mean :-)

I though a GM_object was specifically a geometry.  As such it is
independent of any real world thing - but it can be used as a property of a
real world thing to define a spatial characteristic.

as such I would say GM_Object and (real world thing) are disjoint.

What I dont really understand is what a Spatial Object is, except it seems
to declare that Egenhofer and other spatial operations can be supported on
either GM_Object or GF_Feature.{geomproperty}.   One wonders if a more
elegant way of declaring this was possible without introducing a very
strange abstract notion (and the confusion here I think is the evidence for
the strangeness)

OTOH running with the geoSPARQL as-is makes sense unless its provably
broken in terms of the inferences it allows, so I'll just get over my
distaste of incompatible naming vs. intent.

Rob




On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 at 09:58 Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
wrote:

> I’m questioning whether that is a good idea.
>
>
>
> On May 31, 2016, at 7:43 PM, simon.cox@csiro.au wrote:
>
> In GeoSPARQL SpatialObject is superclass of geometry and spatial feature.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua Lieberman [mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com
> <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>]
> Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 9:39 AM
> To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
> Cc: andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu; l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl;
> frans.knibbe@geodan.nl; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Agenda for Best Practice sub-group, 14:00UTC 1-June-2016
>
> Can't SpatialObject be disjoint from GF_Feature? Maybe it's really
> SpatialRepresentation. Unless we want to call it TransfinitePointSet.
>
> On May 31, 2016, at 6:20 PM, simon.cox@csiro.au wrote:
>
> That preserves the 'thing is not a subclass of geometry' axiom, but misses
> 'geometry is not a subclass of real-world-thing'.
> I don't see how to do that without a subclass of owl:Thing which is
> disjoint from GM_Object.
>
> Simon J D Cox
> Research Scientist
> Land and Water
> CSIRO
> E simon.cox@csiro.au T +61 3 9545 2365 M +61 403 302 672
>  Physical: Reception Central, Bayview Avenue, Clayton, Vic 3168
>  Deliveries: Gate 3, Normanby Road, Clayton, Vic 3168
>  Postal: Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Vic 3169
> people.csiro.au/C/S/Simon-Cox
> orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420
> researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2016 7:12 AM
> To: Andrea Perego
> Cc: Linda van den Brink; Frans Knibbe; SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org)
> Subject: Re: Agenda for Best Practice sub-group, 14:00UTC 1-June-2016
>
> On May 31, 2016, at 10:01 AM, Andrea Perego <
> andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu> wrote:
>
> Dear Linda, dear Frans, dear Josh,
>
> About the agenda item on "spatial ontology", I wonder whether we can
> include here a clarification on the notions of spatial object, feature and
> geometry in GeoSPARQL - in relation to ISO, and to our discussion on
> real-world / spatial things.
>
> In particular:
>
> 1. In GeoSPARQL, feature and geometry are explicitly mapped to the
> corresponding notions in the relevant ISO standards. However, the
> definition of spatial object in GeoSPARQL doesn't seem to match to the ISO
> one ("object used for representing a spatial characteristic of a feature" -
> ISO 19107).
>
>
> Yes, it's questionable whether GF_Feature should be considered a "Spatial
> Object". In ISO 19109, it's a real-world target of discourse, that can have
> properties, including one or more geometric model representations. I'm
> tending towards making GF_Feature an owl:Thing, and leaving GM_Object as a
> SpatialObject.
>
>
> 2. What in GeoSPARQL corresponds to real-world / spatial things?
>
> Thanks
>
> Andrea
>
>
> On 30/05/2016 10:22, Linda van den Brink wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> The Best Practice sub-group telecon agenda is at
> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon20160601.
>
>
>
> Main agenda:
>
> *         Progress of BP Narrative 2
>
> *         Spatial ontology
>
>
>
> See you all on Wednesday! (else please advise any regrets).
>
>
>
> Linda
>
>
> --
> Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
> Scientific / Technical Project Officer European Commission DG JRC
> Institute for Environment & Sustainability Unit H06 - Digital Earth &
> Reference Data Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
> 21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>
> https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>