Hi Michael,
I just met with Carlos Rueda from MBARI/MMI.. and here is what we discussed:
1) We modeled the type of Sensor as a subclass and created equivalent
class restrictions. This was similar to your approach. We were not
required to change the MMI ontology for this purpose.
3) We don't think is neccesary to have specialized objectProperties
such as "withAccuracy..." all those can be modeled with a
hasMeasurementCapabilityCondition object Property as done in MMI
ontology
Enclosed are TobBraid screen shots. Also the ontology in progress is
available at :
http://code.google.com/p/devont/source/browse/trunk/devont/ssn/devontacc-example.owl
-----
Other comments:
About:
"The big differences between this example and the MMI one are the
difference in the relationship of accuracy, latency etc to each other
and
that what is modelled here using condition is modelled in the MMI
example using a measurement range."
instead of "measurement range" should be measurement capability
-----
in SensorBasis_withaccuracy.owl MeasurmentCapability - should be
MeasurementCapability
---
in SensorBasis_withaccuracy.owl not clear in the restriction
hasMeasurmentCapability some
((inCondition some (hasRange some
(Range
and ((hasMaximum value 10.0f)
and (hasMinimum value 0.4f)))))
and (withAccuracy some (hasRange some
(Range
and ((hasMaximum value 0.3f)
and (hasMinimum value -0.3f))))))
not clear what property has the range 0.4 - 10
Cheers,
-Luis
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:35 AM, Michael Compton
<Michael.Compton@csiro.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've put the example from
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Modelling_of_Accuracy%2C_etc into
> an owl file in top braid (attached). I also updated the wiki page to also
> talk about this example.
>
> Thanks
> Michael
>
>
--
Luis Bermudez Ph.D.
Coastal Research Technical Manager
Southeastern Universities Research Association (SURA)
bermudez@sura.org - Office: (202) 408-8211
1201 New York Ave. NW Suite 430, Washington DC 20005
