New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider adding geospatial relations echoing the predicates from DE-9IM #1375

Open
danbri opened this Issue Sep 19, 2016 · 7 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@danbri
Contributor

danbri commented Sep 19, 2016

  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DE-9IM has a list of topological relationship types between 2d-geometrically described places
    • "The Dimensionally Extended nine-Intersection Model (DE-9IM) is a topological model and a standard used to describe the spatial relations of two regions (two geometries in two-dimensions, R2), in Geometry, Point-set topology, Geospatial topology, and fields related to computer spatial analysis. "
  • http://schema.org/GeoShape is the closest schema.org currently gets to having a type for geo-spatial geometry.

It would be useful (as discussed 2016-09-19) at W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web WG meeting in Lisbon if these could be used within schema.org.

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri Sep 19, 2016

Contributor

Suggest:

* geospatiallyEquals
* geospatiallyDisjoint
* geospatiallyTouches
* geospatiallyContains
* geospatiallyCovers
* geospatiallyIntersects
* geospatiallyWithin
* geospatiallyCoveredBy 
* geospatiallyCrosses 
* geospatiallyOverlaps

with text based on Wikipedia's summaries, and allowing each to link either geometries or places.

Contributor

danbri commented Sep 19, 2016

Suggest:

* geospatiallyEquals
* geospatiallyDisjoint
* geospatiallyTouches
* geospatiallyContains
* geospatiallyCovers
* geospatiallyIntersects
* geospatiallyWithin
* geospatiallyCoveredBy 
* geospatiallyCrosses 
* geospatiallyOverlaps

with text based on Wikipedia's summaries, and allowing each to link either geometries or places.

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri Sep 19, 2016

Contributor

Ok I have made a FIRST CUT with DELIBERATE MISTAKES for discussion in Schema.org and W3C circles.

Further things to consider:

  • I included a GeospatialGeometry definition to avoid editing the existing deployed GeoShape (which could become a subtype)
  • It tries to make these relations applicable both at the geometry and at the place level. Of all the relations, "equals" is the hardest to consider without concrete geometry.
  • Text is based heavily on Wikipedia, no proper citation to underlying standards yet.
  • We haven't got inverseOf relations or subPropertyOf relations yet (although schema.org understands these). Also we don't have "symmetric property" in schema.org's meta model yet, although that could be useful here.
  • It was suggested that similar temporal relations could be added (see Working Draft)
Contributor

danbri commented Sep 19, 2016

Ok I have made a FIRST CUT with DELIBERATE MISTAKES for discussion in Schema.org and W3C circles.

Further things to consider:

  • I included a GeospatialGeometry definition to avoid editing the existing deployed GeoShape (which could become a subtype)
  • It tries to make these relations applicable both at the geometry and at the place level. Of all the relations, "equals" is the hardest to consider without concrete geometry.
  • Text is based heavily on Wikipedia, no proper citation to underlying standards yet.
  • We haven't got inverseOf relations or subPropertyOf relations yet (although schema.org understands these). Also we don't have "symmetric property" in schema.org's meta model yet, although that could be useful here.
  • It was suggested that similar temporal relations could be added (see Working Draft)
@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri
Contributor

danbri commented Sep 19, 2016

@rvguha

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rvguha

rvguha Sep 19, 2016

Contributor

Who is this vocab targeted at? Who will mark things up and who will use it?

guha

Contributor

rvguha commented Sep 19, 2016

Who is this vocab targeted at? Who will mark things up and who will use it?

guha

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri Sep 19, 2016

Contributor

It's part of an effort to get existing professional geospatial systems to expose modern Web-based views rather than just GIS-specific standards. Those tools support such relations out of the box. (stopgap reply for now, typing on a phone)

Contributor

danbri commented Sep 19, 2016

It's part of an effort to get existing professional geospatial systems to expose modern Web-based views rather than just GIS-specific standards. Those tools support such relations out of the box. (stopgap reply for now, typing on a phone)

@thadguidry

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@thadguidry

thadguidry Sep 19, 2016

thadguidry commented Sep 19, 2016

@rvguha

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rvguha

rvguha Sep 19, 2016

Contributor

Ok, sounds like a good idea.

guha

Contributor

rvguha commented Sep 19, 2016

Ok, sounds like a good idea.

guha

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment