RE: [georss] Geospatial Incubator Group

Hi,

I agree we need this discussion.  I might point out that with GML we
started small (in 1998/9) with GML 1.0 and that even by GML 2.0 it was
more or less the same size.  Only in GML 3.0 - 2003 did we start making
it larger - not by changing the base model - but by elaborating a larger
category of base objects that could be used in creating application
schemas.

Ron


-----Original Message-----
From: georss-bounces@lists.eogeo.org
[mailto:georss-bounces@lists.eogeo.org] On Behalf Of Josh@oklieb
Sent: July 19, 2006 10:58 AM
To: georss@lists.eogeo.org; GeoXG GeoXG
Subject: Re: [georss] Geospatial Incubator Group

This is a good discussion which I would like to include in the geoxg  
list as well. There is usually some tension between starting small  
and creating a comprehensive foundation. In this case I envision that  
there are plenty of tools on both the SemWeb and GeoWeb sides. The  
small steps (e.g. GeoRSS) are working out how they can effectively be  
combined. An OWL realization of the GML / 19107 feature model is  
sitting out there as a somewhat straightforward goal, but we (at  
least I) do not understand yet how best to enhance both sides with  
this development.

Josh

On Jul 19, 2006, at 1:47 PM, Ron Lake wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I agree, provided you have already thought out HOW to extend beyond  
> the
> simple stuff - since that extension will happen rather quickly.
>
> R
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregor J. Rothfuss [mailto:gregor@apache.org]
> Sent: July 19, 2006 10:07 AM
> To: Ron Lake
> Cc: Carl Reed OGC Account; Mike Liebhold; noiv; georss@lists.eogeo.org
> Subject: Re: [georss] Geospatial Incubator Group
>
> Ron Lake wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> If we want to build a solid foundation for geospatial extensions to
> the
>> semantic web - or flipped the other way to add more semantics into  
>> the
>> GeoWeb - how is geoRSS a foundation.  It strikes me as too limiting
>> unless you have a very restricted notion of what the Geo-Semantic Web
>> means.  I would more favour directions like an OWL encoding of GML or
>> OWL decoration of GML.
>
> too limiting for whom? it boils down to whether you want to cater  
> to GIS
>
> professionals, or a couple orders of magnitude more people. starting
> with something simple that fits on 2 pages of spec strikes me as a
> superior idea if you want uptake. you can always come back and extend
> once people actually use the simple stuff.
>
> -gregor
>
> -- 
> http://43folders.com/2005/09/19/writing-sensible-email-messages/
> _______________________________________________
> georss mailing list
> georss@lists.eogeo.org
> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss

_______________________________________________
georss mailing list
georss@lists.eogeo.org
http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss

Received on Thursday, 20 July 2006 14:26:20 UTC