Allignments - Annex E #234
Conversation
nicholascar
changed the title
|
I wonder if we should provide these alignments also in RDF? Would that not be reasonable? |
If people are happy with them then yet we can, as a separate RDF file or perhaps one filer per alignment - for easy separate loading. But we need to have a few reviews here so that the alignments are broadly thought to be correct. I will contact all the authors of the things aligned with for review. |
1.1/spec/20-Annex-E.adoc
Outdated
| | `geo:hasGeometry` | `rdfs:subPropertyOf` | `locn:geometry` | The LOCN property notes say "Depending on how a geometry is encoded, the range of this property may be one of..." so GeoSPARQL's proerty is learly more specialized. | ||
| | `locn:Address` | `rdfs:subClassOf` | `geo:Feature` | Although LOCN indicates no spatial or geometry properties for `locn:Address`, `locn:Address` is clearly some specialized form of a Feature | ||
| | `geo:Geometry` | `owl:equivalentClass` | `locn:Geometry` | The LOCN class "defines the notion of "geometry" at the conceptual level, and it shall be encoded by using different formats", so GeoSPARQL's class is equivalent. | ||
| | `geo:hasGeometry` | `owl:equivalent` | `locn:geometry` | The LOCN property notes say "Depending on how a geometry is encoded, the range of this property may be one of..." so GeoSPARQL's property is clearly more specialized. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
owl:equivalentProperty
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Adopted the first - geo:Geometry owl:equivalentClass locn:Geometry but not the second geo:hasGeometry owl:equivalent[Property] locn:geometry as I've chosen to keep using rdfs:subPropertyOf since GeoSPARQL's version of this property is clearly more specialized!
|
@dr-shorthair I've adopted all but one of your recommendations and that one's noted above (unresolved comment). @situx can you please review? @kjano if you would like to review, I would love you to! This appendix renders nicely in GitHub at https://github.com/opengeospatial/ogc-geosparql/blob/alignments/1.1/spec/20-Annex-E.adoc |
Which missing ones? Did we list the others we wanted somewhere, I forget. We can merge and then have a follow-up PR, unless you can remember the missing ones quickly. |
|
Yes, the others are at the end of this pull request in Annex E, Wikidata a.s.o. I will find some time to put them in later |
|
That's right, they are in the Doc already, just incomplete. I knew I had seen them somewhere! |
|
I've added quite a few Wikidata mappings |
|
Thanks, I think there are even more. I will dig them up later. |
|
Looks good to me. |
|
2 approvals, merging |
Closes Issue #74