Re: Using rdf:Property class for properties whose URI contains string "time"

See https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Time_in_SOSA_and_SSN

On 04/04/2017 11:26 AM, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote:
> Raul, okay, lets propose this today and see how it flies. My only 
> objection is that this will require an understanding of OWL-Time by 
> SOSA users (and maybe this is not really an issue if we provide 
> examples).
>
>
> On 04/03/2017 02:46 AM, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote:
>>> I see no significant hurdle in stating
>>         :Obs293 sosa:resultTime [time:inXSDDateTime 
>> "2002-10-10T12:00:00"]
>>     Actually :inXSDDateTime is deprecated in favour of 
>> :inXSDDateTimeStamp (which makes the timezone mandatory).
>>
>> 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: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>
>> Sent: Saturday, 1 April 2017 7:00 PM
>> To: Raúl García Castro; janowicz@ucsb.edu; Maxime Lefrançois; SDW WG 
>> Public List
>> Subject: Re: Using rdf:Property class for properties whose URI 
>> contains string   "time"
>>
>> I tend to agree with Raúl. If one of them is already an object 
>> property, it does not really make the use of the SOSA core more 
>> difficult if we also make sosa:resultTime an object property. That 
>> also solves the problem with the sub-property alignment of 
>> ssn:observationResultTime.
>>
>> On 29/3/17, 1:57 pm, "Raúl García Castro" <rgarcia@fi.upm.es> wrote:
>>
>>      Hi,
>>
>>      Yes, my proposal was to reuse the sosa properties in ssn. 
>> However, I
>>      still see the need for consistently reusing the time ontology (also
>>      standardised in this same group) in all the temporal properties and
>>      declaring all of them as object properties.
>>
>>      I see no significant hurdle in stating
>>         :Obs293 sosa:resultTime [time:inXSDDateTime 
>> "2002-10-10T12:00:00"]
>>      instead of
>>         :Obs293 sosa:resultTime "2002-10-10T12:00:00"
>>
>>      And allows practitioners (or people reusing their data) to 
>> exploit the
>>      representational capabilities of the time ontology and further 
>> describe
>>      the time instant (e.g., stating that it is inside a time 
>> interval or
>>      defining the instant with a greater granularity with the
>>      DateTimeDescription class).
>>
>>      In summary, when we take a decision on this, I'd like to see an 
>> option
>>      that goes along this line.
>>
>>      Kind regards,
>>
>>      El 29/3/17 a las 0:23, Krzysztof Janowicz escribió:
>>      > Hi,
>>      >
>>      > Yes, but as I tried to describe on the wiki page[1], this is 
>> for good
>>      > reasons and we discussed them a few times several months ago.
>>      > PhenomenonTime needs to be able to deal with more complex inputs.
>>      >
>>      > The problem that I was trying to explain was that the 
>> currently proposed
>>      > alignment axiom 'ssn:observationResultTime rdfs:subPropertyOf
>>      > sosa:resultTime' is not in OWL2 DL as one is a 
>> DataTypeProperty and the
>>      > other one is an ObjectTypeProperty.
>>      >
>>      > The second case 'ssn:observationSamplingTime 
>> owl:equivalentProperty
>>      > sosa:phenomenonTime. ' is simple because both are object type 
>> properties
>>      > and equivalent anyway.
>>      >
>>      > I liked Raul's proposal (if I understood it correctly) to 
>> deprecate
>>      > observationResultTime and observationSamplingTime and then 
>> reuse the
>>      > sosa properties resultTime and phenomenonTime in ssn without 
>> the need to
>>      > do anything in addition.
>>      >
>>      > Best,
>>      > Jano
>>      >
>>      > [1] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Time_in_SOSA_and_SSN
>>      > On 03/28/2017 03:14 PM, Maxime Lefrançois wrote:
>>      >> Dear all,
>>      >>
>>      >> If I took the minutes correctly today, some of the properties 
>> whose
>>      >> URI contains string "time" are object properties and other are
>>      >> datatype properties, so that's not really consistent.
>>      >>
>>      >> It has been proposed to declare them as instances of 
>> rdf:Property
>>      >> instead of having to choose between ObjectProperty and 
>> DatatypeProperty.
>>      >>
>>      >> This could be interesting, these are the side effects I can 
>> think of now:
>>      >> - we would need to assert these properties are instances of
>>      >> AnnotationProperty, else the ontology would not be OWL DL;
>>      >> - no ontology that extends SSN can assert it's also a 
>> ObjectProperty
>>      >> or a DatatypeProperty;
>>      >> - one cannot make this property be involved in a OWL logical 
>> axiom in
>>      >> any possible way, apart from rdfs:domain, rdfs:range, and
>>      >> rdfs:subPropertyOf;
>>      >> - still, people can create non-OWL rules ()e.g., SPARQL 
>> Construct or
>>      >> SPIN rules) that can generate new knowledge out of some 
>> pattern that
>>      >> involves this property.
>>      >>
>>      >> Best,
>>      >> Maxime
>>      >
>>      >
>>      > --
>>      > Krzysztof Janowicz
>>      >
>>      > Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
>>      > 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060
>>      >
>>      > Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu
>>      > Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
>>      > Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
>>      >
>>
>>
>>      --
>>
>>      Dr. Raúl García Castro
>>      http://www.garcia-castro.com/
>>
>>      Ontology Engineering Group
>>      Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
>>      Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Informáticos
>>      Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
>>      Campus de Montegancedo, s/n - Boadilla del Monte - 28660 Madrid
>>      Phone: +34 91 336 65 96 - Fax: +34 91 352 48 19
>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Krzysztof Janowicz

Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060

Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net

Received on Tuesday, 4 April 2017 18:31:57 UTC