- From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@appmosphere.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:56:26 +0100
- To: "Alexandre Passant" <alex@passant.org>
- Cc: public-xg-geo@w3.org, foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org
Hi Alexandre, RDFS is "descripive, not prescriptive", i.e. if you describe a thing as being based near some other thing, then you simply assert that they are spatial things. There is no problem with using based_near with an org if that org is a spatial thing. hth, benjamin On 26.01.2007 17:07:06, Alexandre Passant wrote: >Hi all, > >I'm currently looking for ways to link things (especially foaf:Agents) >to geonames [1] defined entities (since it provides not only lat/long >info but also useful things as wikipedia entry, neighbour places ...). > >Currently, there's a foaf:based_near property, which links two >geo84:SpatialThing(s) >Since geo:Feature (which is used to define all geonames.org ontology >instances) and foaf:Person are subclasses of SpatialThing, we can link >any foaf:Person to a geonames.org "Feature" as: > >http://apassant.net/foaf.rdf#me foaf:based_near >http://sws.geonames.org/2975249/ > >Yet, foaf:Agent itself is not a subclass of geo84:SpatialThing >So, I cannot say that a foaf:Organisation is located in a city. > >One solution could be to subclass not only foaf:Person from >geo84:SpatialThing, but foaf:Agent itself. > >The other idea would be to create a new property as locatedIn (in >geonames or in geo84 ontology, or even new namespace) that will link >any owl:Thing / rdf:Resource (and not only subclasses of SpatialThing) >to a geo84:SpatialThing, and that then can be subclassed: >bornIn >worksIn >establishedIn >... >(could also create the property in an existing namespace, and the >subproperties in another one, as the relationship vocabulary [2]) > >Thus, I'll be able to describe the location (and specify which kind, >i.e. workplace, establishement place ...) of any foaf:Agent, but also >other things as a ical:VEvent, to point to the city the event is >located, using any geonames Feature instance. > >(I could have suggest to subclass foaf:based_near, but as the "near" >notion is relative, I'm not sure that's a good idea to create >subproperties from it) > >I'll be happy to get feedback about these ideas. > >Best, > >Alex. >_______________________________________________ >foaf-dev mailing list >foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org >http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev > >
Received on Friday, 26 January 2007 16:57:43 UTC