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

RE: Implementation evidence - Producers

From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 02:30:06 +0000
To: <danbri@google.com>, <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>
CC: <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <c8513ebe36c145249a30bf1cde9d5a1a@exch1-mel.nexus.csiro.au>
Hi Dan –

Within the SSN sub-group it was always planned for SOSA to be targeted to the schema.org community.
The limited axiomatization in SOSA was selected with that in mind.
The Rec document is clearly way too dense as documentation, but I guess in schema.org documentation is on the individual classes and properties (rather than a set operating as an ontology).
So we use schema:domainIncludes and schema:rangeIncludes rather than anything stronger.
And we shied away from any subclassing or sub-properties  in the SOSA graph, though we do use owl:inverseOf since it seemed perverse not to.

I lobbed some comments into the schema.org issue list recently drawing attention to a potential clash with one experimental property that was added to schema.org earlier this year – schema:variableMeasured<http://schema.org/variableMeasured> appears to be equivalent to sosa:observedProperty<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/#SOSAobservedProperty>, though I guess it applies at the dataset level rather than the individual observation level.
But would be good to harmonize here in order to reduce the appearance of a fork?


From: Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@google.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 June, 2017 10:20
To: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>
Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Implementation evidence - Producers

I'd be happy to explore that, but it would be good to have some (even informal) encouragement from the SDW WG that this would be a welcome development. We did something similar with a DCAT-based Dataset design a while ago and it seems that we inadvertently caused some frustration as it was seen as a fork. It would be a pity to try to adopt a design based on SOSA (or SOSA/SSN) and for that to be seen in a similar way. Do you think the WG would welcome such an effort?


On 7 June 2017 at 00:37, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au<mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>> wrote:
Hi Dan,

SSN http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/ is now in rec-track and we are to collect implementation evidences in the next 4 weeks. In fact, we need to show demonstrated use in at least two producer implementations and two consumer implementations, with producer implementations, according to our interpretation of the Director’s words meaning that there needs to be two ontologies that extend each term of SOSA/SSN.

You indicated earlier in the working group that you would likely take the simple SOSA core and integrate all or parts of it in Schema.org. Would that be something you could kick off in the next 4 weeks with maybe a Change request to schema.org<http://schema.org>?


Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2017 02:41:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:33 UTC