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

Re: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?

From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:48:25 -0800
To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, "maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr" <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, "jano@geog.ucsb.edu" <jano@geog.ucsb.edu>
Cc: "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <14f1b887-7635-ab2f-ab73-b8fdcd961ea0@ucsb.edu>
> I’d probably  go for just one triple per term, because I can foresee 
> examples wanting to reference  other partial examples for the same term.
>
> However, given that the sosa use case is considerably smaller than the 
> ssn use case for  many terms, I would not want to prohibit a simple 
> sosa-inspired example as well as an ssn-inspired example and these 
> should be distinguishable.

Sounds good to me (assuming by smaller you mean more generic or simpler).


On 02/05/2017 07:38 PM, Kerry Taylor wrote:
>
> I’d probably  go for just one triple per term, because I can foresee 
> examples wanting to reference  other partial examples for the same term.
>
> However, given that the sosa use case is considerably smaller than the 
> ssn use case for  many terms, I would not want to prohibit a simple 
> sosa-inspired example as well as an ssn-inspired example and these 
> should be distinguishable. So.., following my proposed integration 
> architecture I wold ideally have one in the core module and another 
> one in the full module. They would both be true, but the expanded one 
> would reference terms or use cases that are not covered in the simple one.
>
> But of course this does depend on the unresolved integration strategy. 
>  All I was  asking for here was the approval for a simple extraction 
> of existing examples from ssn comments and moving them into a separate 
> property. In which case there will always be only one.
>
> Didn’t I ask this question too some time recently? Maybe it was in 
> that  meeting that discussed this. Let’s not over-think this simple idea!
>
> -Kerry
>
> *From:*Krzysztof Janowicz [mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu]
> *Sent:* Monday, 6 February 2017 2:16 PM
> *To:* Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>; Simon.Cox@csiro.au; Kerry 
> Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>; Armin Haller 
> <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>; maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr; jano@geog.ucsb.edu
> *Cc:* public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?
>
> Btw, would you suggest having one stko:example triple per example or 
> per class/property (in case we have multiple or more complex examples)?
>
> On 02/05/2017 05:57 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
>
>     +1 for using SKOS and not proliferating an alternative :-)
>
>     On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 at 12:11 <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
>     <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
>
>         ØAnd just to confirm (from the spec)
>
>         Ø“Note that *no domain is stated* for the SKOS documentation
>         properties. Thus, the effective domain for these properties is
>         the class of all resources (rdfs:Resource). Therefore, using
>         the SKOS documentation properties to provide information on
>         *any type of resource* is consistent with the SKOS data model.”
>
>         Yep – I had checked this when I first proposed it and it
>         seemed to leave the coast pretty clear.
>
>         *From:*Kerry Taylor [mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au
>         <mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>]
>         *Sent:* Monday, 6 February, 2017 12:06
>         *To:* Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au
>         <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>>; Maxime Lefrançois
>         <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr
>         <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>>; Krzysztof Janowicz
>         <jano@geog.ucsb.edu <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu>>; Cox, Simon
>         (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
>         *Cc:* SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org
>         <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
>         *Subject:* RE: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?
>
>         All good .  I prefer option(a) as long as we don’t import skos
>         and instead option(b) if we feel forced to import skos (which
>         therefore means we don’t import skos). Please don’t kill our
>         simple core or even our complex full ssn by an extra import
>         that we  can easily do without!
>
>         I just checked: skos declares skos:example as an annotation
>         property so if we do so in our ontologies it will not prevent
>         using them together with skos in all its glory if someone
>         wants to. And the same for those other skos documentation
>         properties if we want to use them.
>
>         And just to confirm (from the spec)
>
>         “Note that *no domain is stated* for the SKOS documentation
>         properties. Thus, the effective domain for these properties is
>         the class of all resources (rdfs:Resource). Therefore, using
>         the SKOS documentation properties to provide information on
>         *any type of resource* is consistent with the SKOS data model.”
>
>         -Kerry
>
>         *From:*Armin Haller
>         *Sent:* Monday, 6 February 2017 11:34 AM
>         *To:* Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr
>         <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>>; Krzysztof Janowicz
>         <jano@geog.ucsb.edu <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu>>; Simon Cox
>         <Simon.Cox@csiro.au <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>>
>         *Cc:* Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au
>         <mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>>; SDW WG Public List
>         <public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
>         *Subject:* Re: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?
>
>         This one seems to be an easy one to decide upon. We found the
>         splitting of examples and the definition as useful in a
>         previous meeting, see
>         https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes
>         <https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes>
>
>         I will put the following two options how to implement that for
>         vote in this week’s meeting:
>
>         (a)use skos:example in SOSA/SSN and declare it an owl
>         annotation property
>
>         (b)define our own annotation property -- e.g. sosa/ssn:example
>
>         If we decide for (a) we can also decide on importing SKOS or
>         not in a second vote. Please, in this context also look at the
>         generic comments that I have proposed (as of a discussion I
>         had with Kerry) as a compromise between the current SOSA/SSN
>         rdfs:comments:
>         https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table It would be
>         useful to change/edit those to a state where we agree on the
>         general meaning of the class. In the Wiki, please.
>
>         *From: *Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr
>         <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>>
>         *Date: *Sunday, 5 February 2017 at 10:29 pm
>         *To: *Krzysztof Janowicz <jano@geog.ucsb.edu
>         <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu>>, Simon Cox <Simon.Cox@csiro.au
>         <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>>
>         *Cc: *Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au
>         <mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>>, SDW WG Public List
>         <public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
>         *Subject: *Re: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?
>         *Resent-From: *<public-sdw-wg@w3.org
>         <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
>         *Resent-Date: *Sunday, 5 February 2017 at 10:30 pm
>
>         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 <mailto: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
>             <mailto: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
>                 <mailto: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 <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu>
>
>                 Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
>                 <http://geog.ucsb.edu/%7Ejano/>
>
>                 Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
>
> -- 
> Krzysztof Janowicz
> Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
> 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060
> Email:jano@geog.ucsb.edu <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu>
> Webpage:http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ <http://geog.ucsb.edu/%7Ejano/>
> Semantic Web Journal:http://www.semantic-web-journal.net


-- 
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 Monday, 6 February 2017 19:49:01 UTC

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