RE: ACTION-140: Clearly separate observation, sensor, and deployment parts of ssn (Spatial Data on the Web Working Group)

Thanks for that Armin. It looks good to me so far, although I am having trouble finding the real definitions of the terms-- I can only see partial definitions in webprotege. My username is Kerry for editing rights.

For the hash/slash issue,  could we put these two ontology files to be served from the w3c namespace as set up and just see that it works ok? Ie  "possible to use the same Base URI for all modules while implementing a Conneg on the W3C server where the ontology should be hosted. "  I am afraid I don't quite get how it is going to work and I would like to see it in action. I also wonder whether it might be a bit fragile. If not, then it does seem to be the way to go.

I guess this is a request to @Phil, if agreed.

Kerry



-----Original Message-----
From: Armin Haller 
Sent: Tuesday, 1 March 2016 3:36 PM
To: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group <public-sdw-wg@maia.w3.org>
Cc: Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>; Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>; danh.lephuoc@deri.org; jano@geog.ucsb.edu; Payam Barnaghi <p.barnaghi@surrey.ac.uk>; Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: ACTION-140: Clearly separate observation, sensor, and deployment parts of ssn (Spatial Data on the Web Working Group)

Dear all,

I have uploaded a modularised version of SSN to WebProtégé. I made the projects publicly visible, but editable only by invited people. Please send me your WebProtégé usernames and I will give you editing rights to the projects.

I used https://www.w3.org/ns/ssn as the URI for the SSN Ontology. I further separated out the Dolce-UltraLite part of the SSN ontology. This means, there are TWO projects on WebProtégé as follows: 

SSN:
http://webprotege.stanford.edu/#Edit:projectId=d157feb6-2d05-4f32-a651-e14b83247664



SSN Dolce
http://webprotege.stanford.edu/#Edit:projectId=9c8d11ba-e3ff-49eb-ba85-1d78045fcbd9


I have not made any further modules, i.e. I did not split up the SSN ontology into a Platforms/Deployment, Devices/Systems, StimulusSensorObservation part as proposed earlier by Michael Compton. From our discussions I felt an initial consensus was that these are too many modules. A complete SSN (without Dolce), but without the further modularisation, gives us the opportunity to separate out any further modules if we decide to do so at a later stage. Actuators and the O&M alignment might be two candidates in my opinion.

Further, I made the decision to use Slash URIs for the SSN and the SSN Dolce ontology. This was proposed in our meeting on the 20th of January (https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160120) to make it possible to use the same Base URI for all modules while implementing a Conneg on the W3C server where the ontology should be hosted. The SSN Dolce ontology module has a URI of https://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/dul. This is a fairly significant change (at least for some people who are religious about hash or slash URIs) and needs to be discussed and agreed upon in the working group.

Cheers,
Armin
 

On 9/02/2016 8:50 pm, "Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:

>ACTION-140: Clearly separate observation, sensor, and deployment parts of ssn (Spatial Data on the Web Working Group)
>
>http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/140

>
>On: Armin Haller
>Due: 2016-02-16
>
>If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at:
>http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users/44381#settings

>

Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:33 UTC