- From: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>
- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 11:56:03 +0000
- To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CALsPASWZ1DgxB2XJfrBCPnx2hvBR3Qc5Wv7R2oJjgVc953uPZw@mail.gmail.com>
+1 for what you suggest Kerry. And I suggest we document this conceptual change in a skos:changeNote attached to oldssn:Observation. Kind regards, Maxime Le mar. 21 févr. 2017 à 12:33, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au> a écrit : > SSN-people, > > I am trying to close off this subject as originally posed – and without > diverting into the bigger issue of forecasts and observations. It relates > to solving issue-62 and issue-67 (how does ssn:observation get re-worked as > an activity/act?) > > > > > > (1) Please see the conversation thread here. > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Oct/0089.html > > > > > > (2) it was rooted in Maxime’s observation that > > > > ssn:Observation rdfs:subClassOf [ owl:onProperty dul:includesEvent > ; owl:someValuesFrom ssn:Stimulus ] . > > > > and Maxime’s suggestion (among others that were discussed extensively) that > > > > Ø should this axiom be simply deleted from the SSN-DUL alignment ? > > > > (3) I propose that we do exactly as posed here --- that is, delete the > axiom ssn:Observation rdfs:subClassOf [ owl:onProperty dul:includesEvent > ; owl:someValuesFrom ssn:Stimulus ] > > from > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/dul-alignment.owl > > > > (4) figure 5.9 here may help understanding > https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/XGR-ssn-20110628/ > > > > (5) I don’t think deleting the axiom creates a big problem as the > Stimulus can still be reached from the Observation via the Sensor that > observed it and Stimulus it detects. And if there is an issue with sensors > detecting multiple stimuli (which ssn allows) and so we would not know > which stimulus was involved in the observation (which can happen), then > someone using ssn is going to have to work harder and define a fresh sensor > for each distinct stimulus if they need this. > > > > (6) What to do with the alignment to old ssn? The change to the dul > alignment of Observation itself is already problematic : > > ssn:Observation<http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/Observation> becomes a kind of dul:Event<http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/ont/dul/DUL.owl#Event> instead of a dul:Situation > > > > So… I don’t think we can align old and new ssn in an ontology fragment for > this. I propose that the best we can do is explain the change in > documentation. Any better idea? > > > > Does anyone object to this path forward? > > > > -Kerry > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2017 11:56:48 UTC