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

Re: QB4ST final issues

From: François Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 16:48:22 +0200
To: Bill Roberts <bill@swirrl.com>, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9512fc4e-3da1-45a9-b782-0490e9a6abc1@w3.org>
Hi Rob, Bill,

I prepared a pull request to improve Turtle code sections in the 
document, see:
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/932

That pull request uses a different color scheme for the bits that define 
the ontology and the bits that link to examples, in particular.

This begs a question though: where is the QB4ST ontology normatively 
defined? Using my W3C glasses, I would have expected to find that 
definition in the spec. However, I see the "qb4st.ttl" file contains a 
few classes whose definitions do not appear in the spec, such as 
"qb4st:RefAreaMeasure", "qb4st:TemporalComponentSpecification" or 
"qb4st:SpatialDimensionComponentSpecification".

I would suggest to make section 6 "Vocabulary Reference" explicit that 
the normative definition of the QB4ST ontology is to be found in the 
qb4st.ttl file, and that the spec only contains excerpts.

Francois.


Le 14/06/2017 à 19:23, Bill Roberts a écrit :
> Hi Rob
>
> I've edited section 6.4 of QB4ST to insert a short note about the
> intention to add an example here in future - but have left that section
> there, so no numbering changes arise.
>
> There are still 2 open issues in the document:
>
> ISSUE 129
> Insert appropriate form of reference to SDW work if available to fill
> this gap
>
> If I remember correctly, that was there in case some of the work on
> Geosparql extensions went far enough to define the kinds of base spatial
> concepts you had in mind.
>
> Since that hasn't yet got to the point of a formal document we could
> refer to, then I'm guessing this issue should just be removed, because
> there isn't yet a suitable reference.
>
> I'm happy to make that change, but do I understand correctly what you
> intended?
>
> Thanks
>
> Bill
Received on Monday, 19 June 2017 14:48:36 UTC

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