Re: Spatial relations - was RE: Request for help: BP 9 "How to describe relative positions"

Indeed. I think that topological relations are well covered (I need help
determining which set to use) - but distance and directional relations not
so ...

And then there's describing ill-defined spatial things too-

I've copied part of my original email which describes these aspects:

```
We also need to illustrate use of _directional_ (e.g. "left", "in front of"
and "astern") and _distance_ relations (e.g. "at", "nearby" and "far
away"). I don't know of any formalised vocabulary for expressing these
things. If there is one, should we be seeking to add these to the IANA Link
Relations registry too?

Again, worked examples requested! If you can related them to an urban
environment / flooding scenario all the better. (e.g. someone might assert
"the flooding is near my house")

Finally, we also need to show people how to express "fuzzy" spatial things.
Examples we have elsewhere in the BP doc are "the American West" and
"Renaissance Italy". These are spatial things were there is not general
agreement about the exact geographic extent, so it is not possible to use a
geometry to describe it. What is the best way to describe things like this?
Should we use spatial relations e.g. "downtown" _contains_ city districts
A, C, D, and G (because "everyone" agrees this) - but we're not saying it's
exact geometry because it's a colloquial term used by citizens of our
fictional Nieuwhaven.
```

On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 at 08:38, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:

> I guess I can add a tabulation following one or other of those patterns
> for IANA submission.
>
>
>
> For the spatial topology relations need to makes some choices from the
> tabulations in Figures 1-4 in GeoSPARQL. The RCC8 names are probably too
> technical for common use.
>
>
>
> But of course neither of these covers fuzzy relations, which are so common
> in natural language (“near”).
>
>
>
> Simon
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jeremy Tandy [mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, 2 September 2016 4:27 PM
>
>
> *To:* Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>;
> jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com
> *Cc:* eparsons@google.com; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Spatial relations - was RE: Request for help: BP 9 "How to
> describe relative positions"
>
>
>
> Given they're defined in the Owl-time deliverable it would make sense to
> add the necessary hooks there for the IANA registry to refer to - per
> @phila's email [1].
>
> Next: same discussion for spatial relations!
>
> Jeremy
>
> [1]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Aug/0234.html
>
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 at 02:28, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
>
> Yes – that would be very helpful.
>
>
>
> *From:* Jeremy Tandy [mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, 2 September 2016 2:28 AM
> *To:* Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>;
> jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com
> *Cc:* eparsons@google.com; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Spatial relations - was RE: Request for help: BP 9 "How to
> describe relative positions"
>
>
>
> @simon - that's perfect. Do you agree that it would be a good idea to get
> these registered as Link Relation types on the IANA registry?
>
>
>
> I think the definitions are also in your document [1] for input into the
> registry ...
>
>
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> [1]: https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/#vocabulary
>
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 at 08:56 <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
>
> For temporal relations, I re-drafted a diagram from one of Allen’s papers:
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/images/IntervalRelations.png
>
>
>
> *From:* Jeremy Tandy [mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 31 August 2016 9:43 PM
> *To:* Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>; Cox, Simon (L&W,
> Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
> *Cc:* eparsons@google.com; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Request for help: BP 9 "How to describe relative positions"
>
>
>
> *[…]*
> Finally, I also note that I still need help on the "spatial relations"
> topic that was second in my original email. More help required please.
>
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> *[…]*
>
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 at 10:26 Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi-
>
>
>
> BP doc section § 10.5.1 "Describing location" [1] is where we intend to
> provide all the guidance that explains how you should encode location
> information in a web-friendly way.
>
>
>
> This includes BP 8 "Provide geometries on the Web in a usable way" [2] and
> BP 9 "How to describe relative positions" [3].
>
>
>
> (I think it's likely that we will also need a BP to help people choose the
> right CRS too ...)
>
>
>
> We editors envisage BP 9 covering:
>
>
>
> (1) Linear referencing
>
> (2) Use of spatial relations [4]
>
>
>
> ...
>
>
>
> *[…]*
>
>
>
> (2)
>
> We also want to demonstrate how spatial relations are used. There are
> obvious examples of topological relationships such as "this administrative
> unit _touches_ that administrative unit" (or contains etc.).
>
>
>
> I recall that we were going to get the set of topological relationships
> added to the IANA Link Relations registry [7]. I am not even sure which set
> of topological relations we should be recommending? GeoSPARQL has me
> somewhat confused with "Simple Features Relation", "Egenhofer Relation" and
> "RCC8 Relation". Then there's D9-EIM too ...
>
>
>
> Can someone provide me some worked examples using the preferred set of
> topological relationships?
>
>
>
> We also need to illustrate use of _directional_ (e.g. "left", "in front
> of" and "astern") and _distance_ relations (e.g. "at", "nearby" and "far
> away"). I don't know of any formalised vocabulary for expressing these
> things. If there is one, should we be seeking to add these to the IANA Link
> Relations registry too?
>
>
>
> Again, worked examples requested! If you can related them to an urban
> environment / flooding scenario all the better. (e.g. someone might assert
> "the flooding is near my house")
>
>
>
> Finally, we also need to show people how to express "fuzzy" spatial
> things. Examples we have elsewhere in the BP doc are "the American West"
> and "Renaissance Italy". These are spatial things were there is not general
> agreement about the exact geographic extent, so it is not possible to use a
> geometry to describe it. What is the best way to describe things like this?
> Should we use spatial relations e.g. "downtown" _contains_ city districts
> A, C, D, and G (because "everyone" agrees this) - but we're not saying it's
> exact geometry because it's a colloquial term used by citizens of our
> fictional Nieuwhaven.
>
>
>
> Again, I'd like to see a worked example.
>
>
>
> ...
>
>
>
> There's a lot of questions wrapped up in this email. I'm looking for help
> to resolve them ... preferably with someone in the WG taking the lead to
> coordinate a response.
>
>
>
> I'm also aware that we need to avoid an RDF bias, so it would be good to
> have examples in other formats too.
>
>
>
> Volunteers, please step forward!
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance. Jeremy
>
>
>
> [1]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bp-expr-geo
>
> [2]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#describe-geometry
>
> [3]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#relative-position
>
> [4]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#spatial-relations
>
> [5]: https://github.com/ISO-TC211/HMMG
>
> [6]:
> http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/documents/Data_Specifications/INSPIRE_DataSpecification_TN_v3.2.pdf
>
>
> [7]: http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
>
>
> --
>
> *Ed Parsons *FRGS
> Geospatial Technologist, Google
>
> Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501
> www.edparsons.com @edparsons
>
>