Re: Good practice for publishing geometry of a thing as different geometry types?

Do you mean:
> 
> ex:location1234
>    a dcterms:Location, ex:feature ;
>    ex:centroid ex:geom1234 ;
>    ex:footprint ex:geom6789 .
> 
> ex:geom1234
>    a geom:Geometry, gsp:Point ;
>    geom:crs <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992 <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992>> ;
>    gsp:asWKT "<http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992 <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992>> POINT(...)"^^geosparql:wktLiteral .
> 
> ex:geom6789
>    a geom:Geometry, gsp:Polygon ;
>    geom:crs <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992 <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992>> ;
>    gsp:asWKT "<http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992 <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992>> POLYGON(...)"^^geosparql:wktLiteral .

In that case, the range of gsp:asWKT is not a geometry, but a set of coordinate positions locating the geometry, so “POLYGON” is the format of the coordinate string, not the geometry class per se. 


The coordinate information is more problematic, since one could easily want to have

> ex:geom6789
>    a geom:Geometry, gsp:Polygon ;
>    geom:crs <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992 <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992>> ;
>    gsp:asWKT "<http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992 <http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/28992>> POLYGON(...)"^^geosparql:wktLiteral .
>    gsp:asWKT "POLYGON(...)"^^geosparql:wktLiteral .
    gap:asGML “…”

I consider asWKT to be problematic for this reason, and one ground for updating the GeoSPARQL standard.


 Josh