- From: Peter Parslow via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 06:22:57 +0000
- To: public-sdwig@w3.org
@GeertThijs's description seems in line with this https://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/skos-and-owl/master.html Similarly, https://isotc211.geolexica.org/concepts/1442/ provides TC 211's definition of the concept "Observation" (as SKOS, as well as in various natural languages). I think that's equivalent to one or more of the "Observation" concepts in the OGC Definitions server http://www.opengis.net/def/ogc-om/OM_Observation, http://www.opengis.net/def/ogc-om/om_observation, ... which are also available in SKOS & are tagged as exact matches for each other. I can see why we have OGC & TC211 definitions (less sure why there are so many OGC ones). In https://github.com/ISO-TC211/ontologies/blob/main/iso19156/2011/Observation.rdf, we (TC 211) attempt a definition of Observation as a class. Nick Car is helping us redo that in a more web friendly way. I think that is not unlike the "double typing" which Rob mentions as OGC's practice. We haven't yet agreed which to see as the canonical form - term, concept, OWL class, UML class,... I have my views, but need committee consensus. -- GitHub Notification of comment by PeterParslow Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1372#issuecomment-1309829771 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2022 06:22:58 UTC