- From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 08:20:59 -0700
- To: Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Hi, Both uses are okay from an axiomatic perspective, but the indented one is the second example. It is worth noting that they are not as different as they may seem because (1) can be made very similar to (2) by adding a subclassing axiom that states Occupancy rdfs:subClassOf ObservableProperty. and then change ns:OccupancyBuildingX a ssn:Property ; [KJ: should be ObservableProperty] ... to ns:OccupancyBuildingX a Occupancy. The question is rather how specific we should be to foster interoperability between different datasets, and, IMHO, we should clearly state what we mean. There is a 1:2 relation between observable properties and features (and observations). Science works because no matter how often we measure the temperature of a body and how many different sensors and bodies we use, the measured property is of the same kind, namely temperature. This, for instance, makes sure that we can state that the temperature of body1 is less than of body2 and so on. Best, Jano On 05/05/2017 07:50 AM, Raúl García Castro wrote: > Dear all, > > Taking a look to a previous thread > (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Apr/0335.html) > and to a recent pull request conversation > (https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/792) it seems that there are two > views on what a property is. (1) > Is it something intrinsic to a feature? > ns:OccupancyBuildingX a ssn:Property ; [KJ: should be > ObservableProperty] > ssn:isPropertyOf ns:BuildingX . > ns:OccupancyBuildingY a ssn:Property ; [KJ: should be > ObservableProperty] > ssn:isPropertyOf ns:BuildingY . (2) > Or is it something independent of a concrete feature? > ns:Occupancy a ssn:Property ; [KJ: should be ObservableProperty] > ssn:isPropertyOf ns:BuildingX . > ssn:isPropertyOf ns:BuildingY . > > For those familiar with QUDT, is a Property related to a qudt:Quantity > (first option above) or to a qudt:QuantityKind (second option)? > > Note that both options are supported by current definitions and usage > information, so we need to define clearly what we understand as a > Property and update the definitions and examples to leave it clear. > > Kind regards, > -- 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 Friday, 5 May 2017 15:21:36 UTC