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: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:59:10 -0800
To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, "danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de" <danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <480afd6c-4997-8898-0e96-a84c5ee5382e@ucsb.edu>
> I also prefer option 3, with some suggested changes. Most importantly 
> that we use the term “ObservationValue” instead of “Result”. This is 
> much better for backward compatibility (it was what ssn always used) 
> and solves the “role” con that is raised too., and better complies 
> with sensorML’s “observed value”.  “Result” is too generic. Please see 
> comments on the wiki. 
> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Storing_Observation_Value

I would object such change as this closes the door on results that are 
not from observations (e.g., the actuator work), mixes the idea of a 
result (getting something back) with the value of what one gets back, 
and I fail to see how a naming issue can solve the thematic role discussion.

Best,
Jano


On 02/13/2017 08:33 AM, Kerry Taylor wrote:
>
> I also prefer option 3, with some suggested changes. Most importantly 
> that we use the term “ObservationValue” instead of “Result”. This is 
> much better for backward compatibility (it was what ssn always used) 
> and solves the “role” con that is raised too., and better complies 
> with sensorML’s “observed value”.  “Result” is too generic. Please see 
> comments on the wiki. 
> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Storing_Observation_Value
>
> Btw – option 3 is incomplete as it is presented on the wiki.
>
> -Kerry
>
> *From:*Armin Haller
> *Sent:* Monday, 13 February 2017 9:50 AM
> *To:* janowicz@ucsb.edu; Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>; Maxime 
> Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>; Simon.Cox@csiro.au; 
> danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de; public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Kerry Taylor 
> <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>
> *Subject:* Re: hasResult / Sampling in SOSA & ISSUE-90
>
> Yes, Option 3 will be the one I will put forward as a Proposal in our 
> next teleconference. There was no objection yet on the list.
>
> *From: *Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>>
> *Reply-To: *"janowicz@ucsb.edu <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>" 
> <janowicz@ucsb.edu <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>>
> *Date: *Monday, 13 February 2017 at 9:09 am
> *To: *Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au 
> <mailto:rob@metalinkage.com.au>>, Maxime Lefrançois 
> <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>>, 
> "Simon.Cox@csiro.au <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au 
> <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>>, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au 
> <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>>, "danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de 
> <mailto:danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de>" <danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de 
> <mailto:danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de>>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org 
> <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org 
> <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au 
> <mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>>
> *Subject: *Re: hasResult / Sampling in SOSA & ISSUE-90
>
> 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> <mailto: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 <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, 13 February 2017 16:59:50 UTC

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