Skip to content
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

superproperty for bot:containsZone and bot:adjacentZone - bot:hasZone #30

Open
mathib opened this issue Jun 14, 2018 · 10 comments

Comments

@mathib
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 14, 2018

Similarly as the new bot:hasElement (superprop of bot:adjacentElement and bot:containsElement), there should probably also be a bot:hasZone superprop for bot:adjacentZone and bot:containsZone?

@stickxxx

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 14, 2018

I would agree. And the definition of this new superprop should be similar to the one Mads just suggested for bot:hasElement (e.g. not to be stated explicitly but inferred).

@MadsHolten

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Jun 14, 2018

I would like to see a use case for it first as I cannot think of any.

@stickxxx

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 14, 2018

I was agreeing in the sense that it is coherent with the other superprop. So just for the sake of coherence ;)

@mathib

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jun 15, 2018

This bot:hasZone relation could be used between a stairwell space and the storeys it intersects with? But it could be problematic e.g. if you have a space adjacent to another space belonging to another building. If you then would query for all bot:hasZone of the first building, the adjacent space of another building will be included.

Maybe it's better to have another property on the same level as bot:adjacentZone and bot:containsZone but for intersecting zones, e.g. bot:intersectingZone. I would like a similar property for elements, e.g. bot:intersectingElement for elements that intersect multiple zones. This because the 'contains' and 'adjacent' relations expect an element/zone to be completely contained or adjacent in another zone

@maximelefrancois86

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jun 20, 2018

Could bot:intersectingElement be defined a a sub-property of both bot:adjacentZone and bot:containsZone ?

Consider the following simple use case:

bim1

Which of the following statement(s) is (are) true:

  1. Element 1 is contained in both zones
  2. Element 1 is adjacent to both zones
  3. Element 1 intersects both zones
<zoneA> bot:intersectingElement <element1> .
<zoneB> bot:intersectingElement <element1> .
  • Can you imagin a configuration where intersection does not imply contained ?
  • Can you imagin a configuration where intersection does not imply adjacent ?
@maximelefrancois86

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jun 20, 2018

Here are the proposals we discussed today at LDAC about new properties to link zones and zones, and zones and elements:

new property partlyContainsZone

bot2

new property partlyContainsElement

bot1

@maximelefrancois86

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jun 21, 2018

proposal: introducing partlyContainsElement and partlyContainsZone

@pipauwel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 21, 2018

LDAC2018: potentially take inspiration from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Region_connection_calculus

@maximelefrancois86

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jun 21, 2018

contains, overlaps, adjacent, are just simple enough to be used without errors !

@pipauwel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 21, 2018

LDAC2018: added properties

bot:hasIntersectingElement and bot:intersectsZone

We should consider disjointness between bot:hasIntersectingElement, adjacentElement, and containsElement (not added now)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.