W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > February 2017

Re: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?

From: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 11:29:51 +0000
Message-ID: <CALsPASXPnYbbe3it6=EJjkanzQjtgXDmdrUs8bDsf8nhN+7RvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Krzysztof Janowicz <jano@geog.ucsb.edu>, Simon Cox <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Cc: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Dear all,

+1 for Kerry's (a) :
 - (a) use skos:example and declare it an owl  annotation property (and
this will work for any other skos property too). Also don’t import skos.

My arguments are:

 - SKOS is just used for documentation purposes here. So declaring
skos:example, skos:definition, skos:note as annotation properties suffice
in our case;
 - we don't need of all SKOS axioms. Importing all of them will make
SOSA/SSN more complex to browse in Protégé for example;
 - the users of SOSA/SSN will import SOSA/SSN, but they do absolutely not
need to import SKOS axioms.

Kind regards,
Maxime

Le dim. 5 févr. 2017 à 12:08, Krzysztof Janowicz <jano@geog.ucsb.edu> a
écrit :

> I am certainly fine with SKOS if this is what most of us prefer. Armin,
> can you put this onto our agenda for the next call?
>
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 2:25 AM, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
>
> Btw I never intended to claim that skos was ideal here, but it was
> convenient to separate out the different annotations,. A simple SPARQL
> update could then finalise it to the predicate/namespace of choice.
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
> *Sent:* Saturday, 4 February 2017 5:31:05 AM
> *To:* Kerry Taylor; SDW WG Public List
> *Subject:* Re: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?
>
> Hi Kerry,
>
> I think it would be great if we could discuss this in the group meeting
> next week. I would like to understand our motivation a bit better as well
> as some decisions that we are taking e.g., using skos:example without
> importing skos.
>
> Have a nice weekend
> Jano
>
>
> On 02/03/2017 09:15 PM, Kerry Taylor wrote:
>
> I’d like to follow the approach Simon used in sosa (as we discussed in a
> meeting last year, I think) to separate examples from descriptive comments
> in the ontology using skos:example.
>
>
>
> Are you ok with me doing the same in ssn? I don’t  plan to change the
> content substantively (although I might reword an example a little if it
> seems a bit too hard to follow e.g. too brief). And I’m not going to add
> amore examples at this point --- just move the ones already there.
>
>
>
> I will not import skos.
>
>
>
> Btw– I think this means specgen that we are currently using for the spec
> doco will no longer be able to extract the example – nor for sosa .
>
> -Kerry
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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 Sunday, 5 February 2017 11:30:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:29 UTC