- From: Myriam Leggieri <myriam.leggieri@deri.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:46:34 +0000
- To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- CC: public-sensorweb@w3.org, "public-xg-ssn@w3.org WG" <public-xg-ssn@w3.org>, Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, Manfred Hauswirth <manfred.hauswirth@deri.org>
Hi Marcos, On 22/02/2012 13:05, Marcos Caceres wrote: > Hi Art, > > On Wednesday, February 22, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: > > >> What is the difference between the Web of Sensors CG and the Semantic Sensor >> Networks CG http://www.w3.org/community/ssn-cg/ ? >> > Aside from being better looking, we will, when we (ever) start, look at how to make APIs that integrate with the web platform. The Semantic Sensor group seems to be focusing on "defining and using ontologies and mappings for querying" sensors (which does not strike me as a good starting point, when we don't even have a simple sensor API or a means to communicate with a sensor network… let alone communicating with a kit like an Arduino). a mean to communicate with a sensor network / platform / node is exactly what is addressed by describing the information involved, using Semantic Technologies. Such technologies ease the data communication since they ease the understanding and integration by not relying on ad-hoc schemas or top-down imposed standards (often not covering all the particular needs and having low uptake). That's why ontologies, RDF, Linked Data are important technologies / principles. I'm very interested in a discussion about this (as, I guess, many others), since it would be nice if the Sensor Web and the Semantic Sensor Web [1] could cooperate and unify their efforts. Best regards, Myriam [1]http://wiki.knoesis.org/index.php/SSW > As a starting point, this group should define a means of communicating with things like a networked Arduino (or similar kit, directly). Or even looking at how to make Web Actuators (switching on LEDs, motors, fans, and controlling little monochrome displays, etc). > > Once we have that… then it would be worth while to move into areas like "defining and using ontologies and mappings for querying". But that is a few years away, I would imagine (if ever, given the reliance on "ontologies"). > > Hope that helps! > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 16:06:34 UTC