- From: Josh Lieberman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 19:54:02 +0000
- To: public-sdwig@w3.org
I’m agreeing that it isn’t necessary to add an array property from STA:Multidatastream to ObservationCollection. It might be useful in API’s based on SSN to provide a response format, e.g. JSON SWE Common for requests of the observation members of a Collection. I’ve also proposed that STA:Datastream add a FoI link to better support sensors fixed on one feature (as well as discovery of which ObservedProperties pertain to a given FoI). —Josh > On Mar 23, 2018, at 4:52 PM, Simon Cox <notifications@github.com> wrote: > > I generally shy away from anything that looks like 'arrays' when living in the RDF world, as RDF knows pretty much nothing about ordering, so tuples and arrays end up involving hacks. Probably better going to a micro-syntax inside a literal for that. I suggest this is out of scope for SSN. > > — > You are receiving this because you commented. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1021#issuecomment-375795059>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AExWhobLeiq6w3wk_m3iV7kWtztYyVdoks5thWCKgaJpZM4S35-N>. > -- GitHub Notification of comment by lieberjosh Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1021#issuecomment-375920311 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 24 March 2018 19:54:06 UTC