- From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 20:32:24 -0800
- To: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Simon.Cox@csiro.au, phila@w3.org, public-sdw-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <734c98f0-6997-734e-4f3c-ef31c4e4cb5c@ucsb.edu>
Simon, have you seen the suggestion below to mint local class and property URLs and align them (and use rdfs:isDefinedBy)? > >I doubt this would be helpful but we could perhaps mint new ones that > did dereference and assert >equivalence but that's only worth doing if > it provides some functionality that's actually useful. > > I had the same (or similar) idea but it was already past 2 pm and we > closed the meeting. What we could do is to have an ontology that has > dereferencable URIs for all the classes and properties and for each of > them would also contain rdfs:isDefinedBy statements that point to the > O&M/ISO URIs. rdfs:isDefinedBy explicitly does not put any constraints > on such resources, they do not even have to be Web-available > (https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_isdefinedby). As a final step, > we would establish our mapping axioms in the form of subclass and > equivalence class relations from SOSA/SSN to these dereferenceable > class and property URLs. On 02/08/2017 05:05 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote: > +1 > > > On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 at 11:25 <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote: > > > The question is, of course, can TC211 be encouraged to make > things like http://def.isotc211.org/iso19156/2011/ dereferencable? > If it helps, we'd happily host the relevant data to which those > URIs could redirect (I'm sure OGC and others would too of course). > > I raised this with Jean Brodeur, who is the primary custodian of > the GitHub repository. There is certainly an interest in making > these things dereferencable. > > The blockers are > - resourcing > - limited DNS/HTTP knitting expertise, > - relationship with the ISO/TC 211 secretariat, which recently > moved from Norway to Sweden. > > We were careful to use the def.isotc211.org > <http://def.isotc211.org> domain so as not to get tangled up with > iso.org <http://iso.org>. > But we still have to work with the Swedes, who we don't know so > well yet. > > Practically, there is also the matter of where the actual > resources would be hosted. > Is > raw.githubusercontent.com/ISO-TC211/GOM/master/isotc211_GOM_harmonizedOntology/19156 > <http://raw.githubusercontent.com/ISO-TC211/GOM/master/isotc211_GOM_harmonizedOntology/19156> > acceptable? > And, while I could work with Jean to get .ttl versions put > alongside, I'm not sure that anything much more sophisticated than > that could be expected any time soon. > > > I doubt this would be helpful but we could perhaps mint new ones > that did dereference and assert equivalence but that's only worth > doing if it provides some functionality that's actually useful. > > I'd be reluctant to head that direction. As I mentioned on the > call and in my documentation, URIs in the def.isotc211.org > <http://def.isotc211.org> domain are specified in ISO 19150-2, so > putting another façade in front is really just obfuscation. > > Realistically getting the def.isotc211.org > <http://def.isotc211.org> URIs to dereference is likely to take > months rather than weeks, but I think it is plausible, and if we > are OK with using them as identifiers in the meantime then it is > all defensible in the short term and there would be no > discontinuity in the long. > > Simon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org <mailto:phila@w3.org>] > Sent: Wednesday, 8 February, 2017 17:48 > To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; > public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org> > Subject: Non-dereferencable URIs (was Re: ACTION-255 - o&m alignment) > > I'm sorry I wasn't able to speak about this on the call. By the > time this topic came up I was being driven along the road and had > insufficient bandwidth to un-mute myself although I could hear the > conversation. > > Of course dereferencable URIs are preferred over > non-dereferencable ones. However, this should not be seen as an > absolute requirement or diktat. If there are good reasons to use > non-dereferencable URIs - and it sounded to me as if Simon was > making a very strong case for their use > - and if the non-dereferencable state causes no harm, then go ahead. > > The question is, of course, can TC211 be encouraged to make things > like http://def.isotc211.org/iso19156/2011/ dereferencable? If it > helps, we'd happily host the relevant data to which those URIs > could redirect (I'm sure OGC and others would too of course). > > I doubt this would be helpful but we could perhaps mint new ones > that did dereference and assert equivalence but that's only worth > doing if it provides some functionality that's actually useful. > > Phil > > > > On 07/02/2017 22:26, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote: > > I've dropped it into a Wiki page here (formatting not yet complete). > > > > https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Alignment_to_O%26M > > > > This should help with your namespace and prefix questions Laurent. > > > > From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au > <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>] > > Sent: Wednesday, 8 February, 2017 08:35 > > To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org> > > Subject: [ExternalEmail] RE: ACTION-255 - o&m alignment > > > > If you are unable to see the section in the HTML in the branch, > here is the proposed text: > > > > ----------------------- > > > > 8. Alignment to Observations and Measurements > > > > This section introduces the alignment of SOSA/SSN to OGC > Observations and Measurements [OandM] (also known as ISO 19156:2011). > > > > O&M is specified as a UML model, following the patterns > specified in ISO 19109 Geographic Information - Rules for > Application Schema [ISO-19109]. This means that the classes > represent concepts from the application domain, so can be > approximately equated with classes in an ontology. > > > > Two OWL implementations of O&M have been described: > > > > an explicit translation of the UML following the rules specified in > > [ISO-19150-2] - see [OM-Heavy]; and a handcrafted version in > more idiomatic OWL [OM-Lite]. > > The following sections provide two mappings or alignments > between SOSA/SSN and O&M: the first with the official ISO/OGC UML > conceptual model, and the second with the lightweight OWL > implementation. > > > > 8.1 Alignment to Observations and Measurements UML model > > > > This section is non-normative. > > > > The explicit translation generates an RDF entity for every > class, class attribute, and association-role from the original O&M > UML model. It comes at a cost of a large set of dependencies on > similar OWL translations of other UML models from the ISO 19100 > series. Nevertheless, the URI for each RDF entity is a convenient > identifier to elements of the UML model. These can be used to > identify the elements of O&M in a formal RDF/OWL alignment. > > > > Rules for generating the URIs are provided in [ISO-19150-2], and > appear in the official OWL implementation of ISO 19156 (O&M) > maintained by the ISO/TC 211 Group on Ontology Management. > > > > The following namespace prefixes are used in the alignment to SOSA. > > > > Prefix Namespace > > sosa: http://www.w3.org/ns/sosa/ > > sosa-om: http://www.w3.org/ns/sosa-om# > > iso19156-gfi: > http://def.isotc211.org/iso19156/2011/GeneralFeatureInstance# > > iso19156-om: http://def.isotc211.org/iso19156/2011/Observation# > > iso19156-sf: http://def.isotc211.org/iso19156/2011/SamplingFeature# > > iso19156-sfs: > http://def.isotc211.org/iso19156/2011/SpatialSamplingFeature# > > iso19156-sp: http://def.isotc211.org/iso19156/2011/Specimen# > > Utility classes > > > > Five utiity classes are defined locally to support the > formalization of the alignment. > > > > 1. Three disjoint subclasses of sosa:Procedure: > > > > sosa-om:ActuationProcedure Actuation procedures or recipes > > sosa-om:ObservationProcedure Observation procedures or > recipes > > sosa-om:SamplingProcedure Sampling, sample preparation or > processing > > procedures or recipes 2. Two classes related to sampling, which > complement SOSA classes related to actuation and observation: > > > > sosa-om:SamplingDevice Sampling, sample preparation or > processing devices, comparable to sosa:Actuator and sosa:Sensor > > sosa-om:SamplingEvent Sampling, sample preparation or > processing event or act, comparable to sosa:Actuation and > sosa:Observation > > Class alignments > > > > The primary classes from [OandM] have direct equivalents in SOSA > classes supplemented by the utility classes described above, as > follows: > > > > iso19156-om:OM_Observation equivalent class > sosa:Observation > > iso19156-om:OM_Process equivalent class sosa:Sensor or > sosa-om:ObservationProcedure > > iso19156_sf:SF_SamplingFeature equivalent class > sosa:Sample > > iso19156-sf:SF_Process equivalent class > sosa-om:SamplingDevice or sosa-om:SamplingProcedure > > Additional alignments from SOSA/SSN classes to O&M classes are > as follows. > > > > sosa:FeatureOfInterest subclass of > iso19156_gfi:GFI_DomainFeature > > where iso19156_gfi:GFI_DomainFeature has the definition: > > > > The class GFI_DomainFeature represents 'real-world' features > which are the ultimate subject of an observation campaign, i.e. > the features from an application domain that are not artefacts of > the observation process (sampling features). > > sosa:Actuator subclass of iso19156_gfi:GFI_Feature > > sosa:Platform subclass of iso19156_gfi:GFI_Feature > > where iso19156_gfi:GFI_Feature has the definition > > > > The class GFI_Feature represents the set of all classes which > are feature types. In an implementation this abstract class shall > be substituted by a concrete class representing a feature type > from an application schema associated with a domain of discourse > (ISO 19109, ISO 19101). > > Property alignments > > > > The following properties from [OandM] have direct equivalents in > SOSA properties: > > > > iso19156-om:OM_Observation.featureOfInterest equivalent > property sosa:hasFeatureOfInterest > > iso19156-om:OM_Observation.observedProperty equivalent > property sosa:observedProperty > > iso19156-om:OM_Observation.phenomenonTime equivalent > property sosa:phenomenonTime > > iso19156-sf:SF_SamplingFeature.sampledFeature equivalent > property sosa:isSampleOf > > Additional alignments from O&M properties to SOSA are as follows. > > > > iso19156-om:OM_Observation.procedure sub-property of > sosa:usedProcedure > > iso19156-sp:SF_Specimen.samplingMethod sub-property of > sosa:usedProcedure > > These alignments are modeled as sub-properties because > sosa:usedProcedure applies to actuation, observation or sampling > activities. > > > > iso19156-om:OM_Observation.result sub-property of > sosa:hasResult > > iso19156-om:OM_Observation.resultTime sub-property of > sosa:resultTime > > iso19156-sp:SF_Specimen.samplingTime sub-property of > sosa:resultTime > > iso19156-sp:PreparationStep.time sub-property of > sosa:resultTime > > These alignments are modeled as sub-properties because > sosa:hasResult and sosa:resultTime applies to actuation, > observation or sampling activities. > > > > iso19156-sfs:SF_SpatialSamplingFeature.hostedProcedure > sub-property of sosa:hosts > > These alignments are modeled as a sub-property because the > domain of iso19156-sfs:SF_SpatialSamplingFeature.hostedProcedure > is a spatial sampling feature, such as a station, rather than a > more general platform. > > > > An RDF file containing a graph corresponding to this alignment > is available. > > > > 8.2 Alignment to om-lite implementation of Observations and > > Measurements > > > > This section is non-normative. > > > > An idiomatic OWL implementation of O&M (including Sampling > Features) is described in [OM-Lite]. > > > > The following namespace prefixes are used in the alignment to SOSA. > > > > Prefix Namespace > > sosa: http://www.w3.org/ns/sosa/ > > sosa-oml: http://www.w3.org/ns/sosa-oml# > > oml: http://def.seegrid.csiro.au/ontology/om/om-lite# > > samfl: http://def.seegrid.csiro.au/ontology/om/sam-lite# > > Utility classes > > > > Five utiity classes are defined locally to support the > formalization of the alignment. > > > > 1. Three disjoint subclasses of sosa:Procedure: > > > > sosa-oml:ActuationProcedure Actuation procedures or recipes > > sosa-oml:ObservationProcedure Observation procedures or > recipes > > sosa-oml:SamplingProcedure Sampling, sample preparation or > processing > > procedures or recipes 2. Two classes related to sampling, which > complement SOSA classes related to actuation and observation: > > > > sosa-oml:SamplingDevice Sampling, sample preparation or > processing devices, comparable to sosa:Actuator and sosa:Sensor > > sosa-oml:SamplingEvent Sampling, sample preparation or > processing event or act, comparable to sosa:Actuation and > sosa:Observation > > Class alignments > > > > The primary classes from [OM-Lite] have direct equivalents in > SOSA classes supplemented by the utility classes described above, > as follows: > > > > oml:Observation equivalent class sosa:Observation > > oml:Process equivalent class sosa:Sensor or > sosa-om:ObservationProcedure > > samfl:SamplingFeature equivalent class sosa:Sample > > samfl:Process equivalent class sosa-om:SamplingDevice or > sosa-om:SamplingProcedure > > Property alignments > > > > The following properties from [OM-Lite] have direct equivalents > in SOSA properties: > > > > oml:featureOfInterest equivalent property sosa:hasFeatureOfInterest > > oml:observedProperty equivalent property > sosa:observedProperty > > oml:phenomenonTime equivalent property sosa:phenomenonTime > > samfl:sampledFeature equivalent property sosa:isSampleOf > > Additional alignments from [OM-Lite] properties to SOSA are as > follows. > > > > oml:procedure sub-property of sosa:usedProcedure > > samfl:samplingMethod sub-property of sosa:usedProcedure > > These alignments are modeled as sub-properties because > sosa:usedProcedure applies to actuation, observation or sampling > activities. > > > > oml:result sub-property of sosa:hasResult > > oml:resultTime sub-property of sosa:resultTime > > samfl:samplingTime sub-property of sosa:resultTime > > These alignments are modeled as sub-properties because > sosa:hasResult and sosa:resultTime applies to actuation, > observation or sampling activities. > > > > samfl:hostedProcedure sub-property of sosa:hosts > > These alignments are modeled as a sub-property because the > domain of iso19156-sfs:SF_SpatialSamplingFeature.hostedProcedure > is a spatial sampling feature, such as a station, rather than a > more general platform. > > > > An RDF file containing a graph corresponding to this alignment > is available. > > > > > > From: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) > > Sent: Tuesday, 7 February, 2017 15:58 > > To: 'Simon.Cox@csiro.au' > > <Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au > <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>>>; > > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org><mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org > <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>> > > Subject: RE: ACTION-255 - o&m alignment > > > > Note that this mapping is only from SOSA to O&M (and om-lite). > > > > I also intend to look at the mapping from 'SSN' (i.e. the > vertical axiomatization/extension) of SOSA for observations and > sensing through to O&M. Much of the intended alignment was > captured in annotations in the original ontology, but the > discussions in the last week suggest that some local-names might > change else SOSA classes and properties used in place of old SSN > equivalents. When this has settled down a comprehensive mapping > should be formulated. > > > > Probably the key question arising from the work mentioned below > is whether the proposal to use the URIs that are specified in the > translation of the UML model to OWL, following the ISO 19150-2 > rules, is acceptable. > > > > Pro: > > > > - It allows us to express the alignment formally within > the idiom we are working in (OWL) > > Cons: > > > > - The OWL version of O&M is not in itself published as > a 'standard' and the URIs are not directly resolvable (yet, anyway) > > > > o However, as pointed out in the document, the URIs are > persistent identifiers in the view of ISO, and the fact that ISO's > process does not require a separate document for the OWL > implementation should be OK for us > > > > - UML and OWL are so different in their assumptions > that it is a fallacy to use the OWL implementation as representing > the UML model > > > > I'm sure there are other arguments. My feeling is that the > proposed approach balances formality and pragmatism OK. > > > > Simon > > > > From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au > <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> > > [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>] > > Sent: Saturday, 28 January, 2017 21:33 > > To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org > <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org><mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org > <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>> > > Subject: [ExternalEmail] ACTION-255 - o&m alignment > > > > In response to my ACTION-255 from last week's meeting, I have > generated two RDF files containing formal alignments between SOSA > and O&M. > > > > - sosa-om-mapping.ttl relates to the O&M UML model, and > uses the Official ISO URIs from the OWL implementation prepared by > the ISO/TC 211 Group on Ontology Management following the rules > from ISO 19150-2 > > > > - sosa-oml-mapping.ttl relates to the om-lite and > sam-lite OWL implementation recently published in Semantic Web Journal > > > > I have also prepared text for the SSN document describing these > mappings - for chapter 8 in the spec. > > So far the mappings only concern SOSA. > > > > I've pushed all this into a branch in GitHub > > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/tree/simon-ssn-O%26M-alignments/ssn > > and issued a pull-request https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/516 > > > > Simon > > > > Simon J D Cox > > Research Scientist > > Environmental Informatics > > CSIRO Land and Water<http://www.csiro.au/Research/LWF> > > > > E simon.cox@csiro.au<mailto:simon.cox@csiro.au > <mailto:simon.cox@csiro.au>> T +61 3 9545 2365 > <tel:%2803%29%209545%202365> M +61 403 302 672 <tel:0403%20302%20672> > > Mail: Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Vic 3169 > > Visit: Central Reception, Research Way, Clayton, Vic 3168 > > Deliver: Gate 3, Normanby Road, Clayton, Vic 3168 > > people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox > <http://people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox><http://people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox> > > orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420 > <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420><http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420> > > researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3 > <http://researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3><https://www.researchgate.net/profi > > le/Simon_Cox3> > > github.com/dr-shorthair > <http://github.com/dr-shorthair><https://github.com/dr-shorthair> > > > > PLEASE NOTE > > The information contained in this email may be confidential or > privileged. Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If > you have received this email in error, please delete it > immediately and notify the sender by return email. Thank you. To > the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not represent, warrant > and/or guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been > maintained or that the communication is free of errors, virus, > interception or interference. > > > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > > > > > > -- > > > Phil Archer > Data Strategist, W3C > http://www.w3.org/ > > http://philarcher.org > +44 (0)7887 767755 <tel:+44%207887%20767755> > @philarcher1 > -- 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 Thursday, 9 February 2017 04:33:02 UTC