- From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 09:19:25 -0800
- To: Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, Simon.Cox@csiro.au, kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au, armin.haller@anu.edu.au, public-sdw-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <2db4c482-7203-1854-68b4-14792ca70054@ucsb.edu>
> DUL alignment is probably only relevant to existing DUL users (and is > perhaps transitive anyway due to SSN alignment and can be dropped as a > separate artefact?) Yes, SOSA does not need a separate DUL alignment (and personally believe that the SSN to DUL alignment should be non-normative). I also agree that the SOSA to O&M alignment is very important. Best, Krzysztof On 01/02/2017 08:22 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote: > My perhaps naive take on this is that the making the SSN alignment > normative is an "acceptable kludge" to show the semantics of SOSA are > acceptable to a broader community. I would however suggest that from > an OGC canon perspective making the O&M alignment normative makes SOSA > immediately relevant to that particular community - and certainly far > more understandable (nothing worse that something that seems like its > similar but you're not sure what the differences may be!) > > DUL alignment is probably only relevant to existing DUL users (and is > perhaps transitive anyway due to SSN alignment and can be dropped as a > separate artefact?) > > Rob > > > On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 at 16:05 <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote: > > Fair enough. > > I only created sosa-om and sosa-oml a week ago, so hardly any time > for the SSN group to have inspected it. > > However, the basic alignment has been available since early July. > It can be seen in > > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/commits/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/om.ttl > > which was created at the same time as SOSA. > > This (om.ttl) was designed to be an OWL implementation of O&M as a > ‘vertical’ extension of SOSA – prompted by the diagram which was > also available back then > > It was also intended to explore the vertical modularization > principle – it appeared to work well. > > Unfortunately we have not made time in the meetings since then to > properly consider the modularization. > > Simon > > *From:*Kerry Taylor [mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au > <mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>] > *Sent:* Thursday, 22 December, 2016 12:37 > *To:* Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; Armin Haller > <armin.haller@anu.edu.au <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>>; > public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org> > > > *Subject:* RE: SSN - Notes dropped from O&M alignment chapter? > > I am not very happy about that section because it implies some > level of endorsement by the group and I suspect nobody other > than the author has looked at it (or at least there is no > evidence of that). Nor is there even any discussion on about what > form such a thing might take (and yes, you raised some valid > issues on this topic,) other than appearance on the diagram. > > Furthermore, it falls well down the priority list as far as I know > it. And I am not happy with putting it into the draft when much > more important things (on which that depends) are not settled, or > not even begun. For example, structural issues with sosa. For > example, missing relationship between sosa and ssn. > > We have to prioritise very carefully in the limited amount of > time we have left. And forcing something into the WD is not a very > helpful way to prioritise. > > See also my comments earlier about a “primer”. > > *From:*Simon.Cox@csiro.au <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au> > [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au] > *Sent:* Wednesday, 21 December 2016 2:55 PM > *To:* Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au > <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org > <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org> > *Subject:* RE: SSN - Notes dropped from O&M alignment chapter? > > OK – not really happy about that, as it reduces the possibility of > scrutiny of important technical material. But maybe we can have > quicker revision cycles moving forward. > > I also just noticed that all the alignment sections _/except/_ > with O&M are marked ‘normative’. That was not my understanding at > this stage. > > Simon > > *From:*Armin Haller [mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au] > *Sent:* Wednesday, 21 December, 2016 14:24 > *To:* 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> > *Subject:* Re: SSN - Notes dropped from O&M alignment chapter? > > Hi Simon, > > Kerry had an objection against these notes (that have been > committed after Monday last week) to be included without > consultation, therefore they have been removed for this WD. We > will discuss them in our next meeting. > > Cheers, > Armin > > *From: *"Simon.Cox@csiro.au <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>" > <Simon.Cox@csiro.au <mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> > *Date: *Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 11:05 am > *To: *"public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>" > <public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>> > *Subject: *SSN - Notes dropped from O&M alignment chapter? > *Resent-From: *<public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>> > *Resent-Date: *Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 11:10 am > > Somewhere in the changes in the last day, we also lost two NOTEs > from the O&M alignment section, which pointed to RDF files > containing proposed alignments in the GitHub repo. Can these be > restored? > > Here is the dropped html: > > <p class="note">An RDF representation of a preliminary > SOSA-O&M alignment is at <a > href="https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa-om.ttl">https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa-om.ttl</a > <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa-om.ttl%3c/a>> > . URIs from the official ISO/TC 211 OWL implementation are used to > identify the UML elements from ISO 19156/OGC O&M. </p> > > <p class="note">An RDF representation of a preliminary > SOSA-om-lite alignment is at <a > href="https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa-oml.ttl">https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa-oml.ttl</a > <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa-oml.ttl%3c/a>>. > </p> > > Since the files are available, it would be helpful for people > reviewing the document to be given a link to find them. > > Simon > > *From:*Danh Le Phuoc [mailto:notifications@github.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, 21 December, 2016 08:46 > *To:* w3c/sdw <sdw@noreply.github.com <mailto:sdw@noreply.github.com>> > *Cc:* Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com > <mailto:subscribed@noreply.github.com>> > *Subject:* [w3c/sdw] ISSUE-114: Move SOSA description before SSN > (#476) > > as proposed in the telco, I swapped section 4 and 5, this PR will > address Issue-114, https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/114 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request > online at: > > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/476 > > > Commit Summary > > * ISSUE-114: Move SOSA description before SSN > > > File Changes > > * *M*ssn/index.html > <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/476/files#diff-0> (6459) > > > Patch Links: > > * https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/476.patch > * https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/476.diff > > — > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/476>, or mute the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAlIL-21Pl6uCPbXegrGY14oxNn_T4Cxks5rKEyvgaJpZM4LSVad>.mage > removed by sender. > -- 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 Tuesday, 3 January 2017 17:20:04 UTC