W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > May 2016

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

From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 22:20:37 +0000
To: <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>, <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
CC: <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1464733235979.10995@csiro.au>
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, itís questionable whether GF_Feature should be considered a ďSpatial ObjectĒ. In ISO 19109, itís a real-world target of discourse, that can have properties, including one or more geometric model representations. Iím 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/
>
>



Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2016 22:21:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:21 UTC