Re: Survey paper

Simon,

How are data values translated to RDF? For example,

<CompositePhenomenon gml:id="foo">
...
   <component xlink:href='http://example.org/R3'/>
...
</CompositePhenomenon>
...
<swe:encoding>
   <swe:AsciiBlock decimalSeparator="." tokenSeparator=",", tupleSeparator="
"/>
</swe:encoding>
...
<swe:value>
   ... 42.0 ...
</swe:value>

to

<Description rdf:about="#foo" rdf:type="CompositePhenomenon ">
...
   <component rdf:resource="http://example.org/R3"/>
...
</Description>
<Description rdf:about="#R3" rdf:type="...">
   <value>42.0</value>
</Description>


I know there are different record formats (<swe:record>) that may be more
easily annotated, and thus provide a more clear translation, but in general
is there a standard way to map the values to RDF?

-Cory


On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Simon Cox <simon.cox@jrc.ec.europa.eu>wrote:

>  'model reference to a ontological description' vs 'composition by
> inclusion of remote resources'
>
> Not sure. The emphasis is a little different.
> I understand the intention of 'annotation' is to add some richer
> description, as an adjunct to something local.
> The intention of the latter is not to have anything local, just a pointer
> to a remote resource.
> Augmenting vs deferring the description.
>
> The mapping to RDF is straightforward.
> GML was actually modelled on the RDF meta-model (though the XML syntax is
> not the same - that's history).
> Lower-case XML elements (e.g. component) are RDF properties, while the
> upper-case XML elements (e.g. CompositePhenomenon) are RDF Resources.
> So when you see
>
> <CompositePhenomenon gml:id="foo">
> ...
>    <component xlink:href='http://example.org/R3'/<http://example.org/R3%27/>
> >
> ...
> </CompositePhenomenon>
>
> think
>
> <Description rdf:about="#foo" rdf:type="CompositePhenomenon ">
> ...
>    <component rdf:resource"http://example.org/R3"/>
> ...
> </Description>
>
> or
>
>  <Description rdf:about="#foo" rdf:type="CompositePhenomenon ">
> ...
>    <component>
>       <Description rdf:about="http://example.org/R3"
> rdf:type="SimplePhenomenon>
>        ... stuff ...
>       </Description>
>    </component>
> ...
> </Description>
>
> (Apologies for the dodgy RDF/XML.)
>
>
>
> Simon Cox
>
> European Commission, Joint Research Centre,
> Institute for Environment and Sustainability,
> Spatial Data Infrastructures Unit, TP 262
> Via E. Fermi, 2749, I-21027 Ispra (VA), Italy
> Tel: +39 0332 78 3652
> Fax: +39 0332 78 6325
> mailto:simon.cox@jrc.ec.europa.eu <simon.cox@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
> http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/simon-cox
>
> SDI Unit: http://sdi.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
> IES Institute: http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
> JRC: http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Cory Henson
> *Sent:* Thursday, 13 August 2009 14:27
> *To:* Simon Cox
> *Cc:* Michael.Compton@csiro.au; public-xg-ssn@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Survey paper
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thanks for the comment.  We are using the term semantic annotation as
> described in SAWSDL, as a model reference to a ontological description.
> Does this conflict with the description as a 'composition by inclusion of
> remote resources'? As far as mapping to RDF, this is in comparison to RDFa
> which has a known syntactic translation from the set of annotations to RDF
> triples. While xlink:href maps to rdf:resource, how would the values of
> properties of this resource be translated to RDF? If this is not correct, or
> the wording is awkward, please point us in the right direction.  Thanks for
> your help.
>
> -Cory
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Simon Cox <simon.cox@jrc.ec.europa.eu>wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike -
>>
>> A clarification relating to semantic annotations and xlink:
>>
>> In GML-style XML documents, xlink:href plays the same role as rdf:resource
>> in an RDF/XML document.
>> I.e. it holds a pointer to external resource, which could be pasted inline
>> as an anonymous node with equivalent semantics.
>> This is a basic GML pattern and is explained in the GML spec
>> http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=20509 clause 7.2.3.
>> The examples involving xlink:href in Figure 2 aren't exactly
>> 'annotations',
>> more 'composition by inclusion of remote resources'.
>>
>> So I'm not sure if the example supports the point you are making.
>>
>> You comment 'XLink has no predefined mapping to RDF.'
>> As mentioned above, _as used in GML documents_ xlink:href maps to
>> rdf:resource.
>>
>> Simon Cox
>>
>> European Commission, Joint Research Centre,
>> Institute for Environment and Sustainability,
>> Spatial Data Infrastructures Unit, TP 262
>> Via E. Fermi, 2749, I-21027 Ispra (VA), Italy
>> Tel: +39 0332 78 3652
>> Fax: +39 0332 78 6325
>> mailto:simon.cox@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>> http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/simon-cox
>>
>> SDI Unit: http://sdi.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
>> IES Institute: http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
>> JRC: http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-ssn-request@w3.org]
>> On
>> Behalf Of Michael.Compton@csiro.au
>> Sent: Thursday, 13 August 2009 13:43
>> To: public-xg-ssn@w3.org
>> Subject: Survey paper
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Sorry it's so close to the SSN'09 deadline, but with help from Cory and
>> Holger, I (finally) have a survey paper.  Please read, comment, etc.
>>
>> (there are a couple of obvious tweaks/FIXME's yet to be made)
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cory Andrew Henson
> Kno.e.sis Center, Wright State University
> http://knoesis.wright.edu/researchers/cory/
>



-- 
Cory Andrew Henson
Kno.e.sis Center, Wright State University
http://knoesis.wright.edu/researchers/cory/