W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-socialweb@w3.org > October 2014

Re: Geo data in JSON-LD

From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 22:06:49 +0200
Message-ID: <5436EAD9.1030405@wwelves.org>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org Vocabs" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, sean.gillies@gmail.com
On 10/09/2014 07:02 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> (fyi... cross posted to public-vocabs and public-socialwb, sorry to
> those who receive this twice)
> 
> I'm working on use cases for expressing geo data in Activity Streams
> 2.0. The original thought was to leverage GeoJSON but since JSON-LD
> does not support GeoJSON's lists-of-lists model for coordinates, I'm
> looking at using the W3C Basic Geo Vocabulary
> (http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/) for simple cases and the OpenGIS
> GeoSparql vocabulary (WKT) for more complex cases. I noticed that I'm
> not the only one considering this [see:
> https://github.com/rvguha/schemaorg/issues/113] so I figured a quick
> sanity check discussion here would be worthwhile.
great news! i worked a year ago on open source prototype of
decentralized app build around real time geo aware collaboration:
http://dspace.elevate.at/

i hope to have chance of picking up work on it in January so could test
all that stuff there as well :)


> 
> First, the simple case:
> 
> {
>  "@context": [
>    "http://asjsonld.mybluemix.net"
>   ],
>   "@type": "as:Activity",
>   "verb": "post",
>   "actor": {
>     "@type": "urn:example:types:Person",
>     "@id": "urn:example:people:joe",
>     "displayName": "James M Snell",
>     "location": {
>       "@type": "geo:Point",
>       "geo:lat": 1.23,
>       "geo:long": 3.45
>     }
>   },
>   ...
> }
> 
> This case ought to be fairly straightforward. The one thing I will
> note, however, is that the W3C Geolocation API
> [http://www.w3.org/TR/geolocation-API/#position_interface] provides
> significantly more detail than what the Basic Geo Vocabulary is
> currently able to capture. I'm curious as to whether or not it would
> make sense to update the Basic Geo Vocabulary to include these
> additional data points. Specifically adding:
> 
>   geo:altitude
>   geo:accuracy
>   geo:altitudeAccuracy
>   geo:heading
>   geo:speed
+1 for supporting all the Geolocation API properties + timestamp
at the same time we could look at alignment with GeoJSON-LD & Schema.org


> 
> For the more complex cases, using the WKT specification seems to make
> the most sense:
> 
> {
>  "@context": [
>    "http://asjsonld.mybluemix.net"
>   ],
>   "@type": "as:Activity",
>   "verb": "post",
>   "actor": {
>     "@type": "urn:example:types:Person",
>     "@id": "urn:example:people:joe",
>     "displayName": "James M Snell",
>     "location": {
>       "@type": "geos:Geometry",
>       "geos:asWKT": "Polygon((-83.6 34.1, -83.2 34.1, -83.2 34.5,
> -83.6 34.5, -83.6 34.1))"
>     }
>   },
>   ...
> }
> 
> Seem like a sane approach to folks?
does as in asWKT stands for Activity Streams? i don't think we need to
make it activity streams specific and it looks like a lot of
collaboration already happened in context of GeoJSON-LD (+cc Sean
Gillies) https://github.com/geojson/geojson-ld/issues/28
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:09:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:26:13 UTC