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

Re: hasResult / Sampling in SOSA & ISSUE-90

From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 14:09:46 -0800
To: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, Simon.Cox@csiro.au, armin.haller@anu.edu.au, danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de, public-sdw-wg@w3.org, kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au
Message-ID: <0fac1257-8c1b-f649-f879-ac9f614516da@ucsb.edu>
Looking at the comments and reactions so far, option 3 seems to be the 
favorite, right? Put differently, so far nobody called option 3 a 
deal-breaker.

[I am *not* implying any kind of formal vote here and I am not assuming 
that these comments imply a decision by the group. I am just trying to 
coordinate my actuation part with the observation part to keep them in 
sync and that would work well if we use option 3.]

On 02/10/2017 01:57 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Roles as classes in a polymorphic sense works.
>
> Just noting that in the xml world the o&m placeholders worked but 
> caused significant challenges (i.e. needed an explicit mechanism to 
> map implementation types into these placeholders - i.e  the role 
> needed to be handled outside the schema mechanism.
>
> Rob
>
>
> On Sat, 11 Feb 2017, 1:17 AM Maxime Lefrançois 
> <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Simon,
>
>
>         > Result is a role, not a proper class
>
>         Yes, I agree. In O&M we left it as a wildcard, and that was
>         when dealing only with observation results, which are at least
>         only 'values'!
>
>         In SOSA the scope is explicitly increased to include Actuation
>         and Sampling, the results of which are less clear. As
>         mentioned in my mail earlier this week, the result of a
>         sampling activity is primarily a new (or transformed) sample.
>         Actuation usually changes the value of some property so is
>         probably closer to the observation/sensing world.
>
>         Using OWL it is quite reasonable to model roles as classes. So
>         I guess I would see sosa:Result as being a superclass of (at
>         least) sosa:Sample and ssn:ObservationValue.
>
>
>     So preferably 3 than 4 for you ?
>
>     I added a section "proposed implem" for solution 3. Can you check
>     this reflects your proposal ?
>
>     Kind regards,
>     Maxime
>
>
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From: Armin Haller [mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au
>         <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>]
>         Sent: Friday, 10 February, 2017 11:18
>         To: Le Phuoc, Danh <danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de
>         <mailto:danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de>>; Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton)
>         <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
>         <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>; Kerry Taylor
>         <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au <mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>>;
>         Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu
>         <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>>; Maxime Lefrançois
>         <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>>
>         Subject: Re: hasResult / Sampling in SOSA & ISSUE-90
>
>         Thanks Danh for your detailed analysis of the Observation
>         Value issue! I have added Option Numbers to the Wiki, to make
>         it easier to refer to them.
>
>         I encourage everyone to look at the current proposals. As far
>         as I can tell from previous discussions on the list several
>         group members prefer Option 3, collapsing the property path in
>         SOSA (and also in SSN) and not offering a hasValue relation.
>         This also aligns to the decisions made in our best practices
>         document. It also follows the Pareto principle.
>
>         I will watch the ensuing discussion and if there is a
>         compromise emerging on the list, I will also try to put this
>         issue for vote in our next meeting.
>
>         On 10/2/17, 2:07 am, "Le Phuoc, Danh"
>         <danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de <mailto:danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de>>
>         wrote:
>
>             Hi all,
>
>             As requested from Armin to outline a solution for attach
>         values to observations as a part of the solution mentioned in
>         this issue: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/90,
>         I  created a Wiki page at
>         https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Storing_Observation_Value
>         with some figures to illustrate the possible patterns :
>         collapsing or not collapsing ssn:SensorOutput and
>         ssn:ObservationValue.
>
>             I’m trying to collecting inputs/proposals from previous
>         minutes to populate the wiki page but I got lost. I would
>         appreciate if you could point me to your proposals in the
>         minutes or even better put them directly to the Wiki so that I
>         could consolidate them before the next call.
>
>             Best,
>
>             Danh
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
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, 12 February 2017 22:10:22 UTC

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