- From: María Poveda <mpoveda@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:33:59 +0200
- To: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>
- Cc: MEDINI LIONEL <lionel.medini@univ-lyon1.fr>, "Le Phuoc, Danh" <danh.lephuoc@tu-berlin.de>, Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>
- Message-ID: <CA+mx6Z3A0OX7aFWh4rs5bgbXOZXZWwArwUA2gGZbcQMk_JxvvA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Maxime, sorry for the late reply. Thank you very much for the suggestions and typos spotted. We are processing your suggestions and I guess most of them should be accepted by the WG. Somethings will be difficult to do as changing the to wot:PropertyInteractionPattern as it was a discussion about that in the WG and the decision was to reduce the names as much as possible. We'll be back to you. I include Raul in cc as I'm afraid he is not getting the emails. Best, María On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr > wrote: > Dear all, > > Following Lionel Medini's request to provide an initial alignment between > the SOSA/SSN and the WoT ontology (see mail below), > > Considering the TD JSON-LD context are at > - http://w3c.github.io/wot/w3c-wot-td-context.jsonld > - http://w3c.github.io/wot/w3c-wot-common-context.jsonld > > and considering that these contexts refer to the ontologies at > "td": "http://iot.linkeddata.es/def/wot#", and > "saref": "http://uri.etsi.org/m2m/saref#", (shouldn't it be > https://w3id.org/saref# ?) > > I would rather open the discussion to Raul, Maria and Victor. My initial > guess for an alignment between the SOSA/SSN ontology and the VICINITY wot > ontology would be: > > wot:Thing rdfs:subClassOf ssn:System . > wot:providesInteractionPattern rdfs:subPropertyOf ssn:implements . > wot:InteractionPattern rdfs;subClassOf sosa:Procedure . > wot:hasInputData rdfs:subPropertyOf ssn:hasInput > wot:hasOutputData rdfs:subPropertyOf ssn:hasOutput > > > @authors of the wot ontology, some preliminary comments: > - I just noticed what may be typos in the definition of wot:MediaType: > estructured --> structured, os --> of , Definicion --> Definition > - typo in the label of wot:isReadableThrough > - I would suggest to rename wot:Property to wot:PropertyInteractionPattern > to avoid confusion with ssn:Property > - same for wot:Event and wot:Action ? > - do you really want to impose the use of OM for units of measures ? or > could we use QUDT instead ? > - instead of wot:DataSchema, couldn't we use the class > rdfp:GraphPresentation from the RDFP ( https://w3id.org/rdfp/ ) ontology > to generalize a bit to any RDF Graph that has some validation rules / > lifting rules / lowering rules ? That could help to cover cases where input > data or output data do not solely consist in a quantity value (ex. some > text, concepts, or force and torque values) > - could we have wot: properties that map to the CoRE resource directory rt > (resource type) and if (interface) Web Link target attributes ? see RFC6690 > - instead of a property with a boolean range, I've heard it's good > practice to use classes instead --> disjoint classes RequiredProperty and > OptionalProperty ? > > Some other suggestions come to my mind, but that should be a good starting > point to develop discuss further the development of that nice wot ontology > and it's alignment to SSN. > > @Lionel, some more comments inline > > Best, > Maxime Lefrançois > > Le ven. 7 juil. 2017 à 16:41, MEDINI LIONEL <lionel.medini@univ-lyon1.fr> > a écrit : > >> Hi Maxime, >> >> >> >> As I understand, Danh won’t have time to answer this email, so I rely on >> you. >> >> >> >> Currently, I have mapped sosa:Platform as subclass of wot:Thing. >> > > Because I would like to align ssn:implements with wot:providesInteractionPattern, > then I suggested to align ssn:System to wot:Thing instead. > > >> In order to show requests that are able to do more complex things than >> retrieving instances of WoT Thing, I will need more mappings between the 2 >> ontologies. For instance, it would be good if we could retrieve all things >> in a given area (deployment ?), >> > > Deployment should not be considered here, you can add lat/long coordinates > to anything provided that it is physical --> sosa:Platform, sosa:Sensor, > sosa:Actuator, sosa:Sampling, ssn:System... (not sure about ssn:Deployment > because it's aligned to dul:Event....) > > >> or a list of available temperature sensors by querying TD classes and >> properties. >> > >> >> Do you have / could you provide me with a turtle file stating such >> mappings? >> >> >> >> Thanks in advance for your help, >> >> >> >> Lionel. >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------- >> >> Lionel Médini - associate professor >> >> LIRIS Lab / University of Lyon >> >> Phone: +33 4 72 43 16 36 <04%2072%2043%2016%2036> >> >> Fax: +33 4 72 43 15 36 <04%2072%2043%2015%2036> >> >> mailto:lionel.medini@liris.cnrs.fr <lionel.medini@liris.cnrs.fr> >> >> https://liris.cnrs.fr/lionel.medini/ >> >> >> > -- María Poveda Villalón, PhD Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Madrid, Spain e-mail: mpoveda@fi.upm.es website: http://mariapoveda.github.io/ blog: http://thepetiteontologist.wordpress.com/
Received on Thursday, 27 July 2017 14:34:51 UTC