- From: John Graybeal <graybeal@mbari.org>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 13:52:09 -0600
- To: "Kevin R. Page" <krp@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-xg-ssn@w3.org
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:20 AM, Kevin R. Page wrote: > We should recognise that both user-oriented (data) and process- > oriented > (sensor) use cases exist (as reflected in current OGC standards). I am having trouble with this framing; maybe just an ambiguity, or maybe more. I agree that use cases about the (actual output) data *produced by* sensors exist. Use cases about the data *describing* actual sensors (name, size, color, and all that) also exist. The latter is what I thought a device ontology should encompass. The sensor description instance needs to include a characterization of the kind and format of data that the sensor *can* produce. All of that is included in what I would call a description/model/ontology of a sensor. But not actual data outputs. So, which of these did you mean by 'user-oriented (data)'? (I suggest that 'user-oriented' is entirely a function of the user, and some users care only about the devices, not their data; so maybe this isn't an optimal term.) Will the introduction of the 'process oriented' way of looking at the device -- the framing introduced by SensorML, which I have heard summarized as "the sensor is a process", right? -- tell me more, less, or the same information as a 'simple descriptive model'? Put another way, is there necessarily any difference between the two? I am sorry if this is a basic question or has already been discussed. To tie this back to the larger question I started with, It just seems to me that where some element comes from a process, the ontology will naturally describe that ("sensor producesDataRecord recordType1"). I didn't have to make the device into a process a priori, and I embed O&M-type concepts (from O&M or elsewhere) only as they are needed by the description of the sensor. John -------------- John Graybeal <mailto:graybeal@mbari.org> -- 831-775-1956 Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 19:53:00 UTC