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

use GeoSPARQL instead of osgeo #11

Open
VladimirAlexiev opened this issue May 15, 2018 · 6 comments
Open

use GeoSPARQL instead of osgeo #11

VladimirAlexiev opened this issue May 15, 2018 · 6 comments

Comments

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link

https://github.com/isawnyu/pleiades-rdf#user-content-ordnance-survey-ontology states " extents of spatial objects are expressed using osgeo:AsGeoJSON, and osgeo:AsWKT" where osgeo is http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/geometry/. This is confirmed by http://atlantides.org/capgrids/2.ttl that uses props osgeo:asGeoJSON, osgeo:asWKT.
There are 2 flaws with this approach:

Please use the GeoSPARQL standard that is implemented by at least 4-5 repositories (GraphDB, Virtuoso, uSeekM, Strabon...). Eg

@prefix geo: <http://www.opengis.net/ont/geosparql#> .
<http://example.org/1/geometry>
        geo:asWKT "<http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/OGC/1.3/CRS84>POLYGON ((-3.70 40.42, ...))"^^geos:wktLiteral.
<http://example.org/2/geometry>
        geo:asWKT "<http://www.opengis.net/def/crs/EPSG/0/23030> POLYGON ((439930.8579 4475096.6375, ...))"^^geo:wktLiteral.

(examples from openlink/virtuoso-opensource#455).

Note:

Unfortunately GeoSPARQL doesn't define a property asGeoJSON. I don't know of an ontology to define such property officially. But just using osgeo:asGeoJSON that is not defined is not good. As @ewg118 wrote in https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/pelagios-project/QAyZw__8pDg 4 years ago: "Is asGeoJSON a proposed property that doesn't exist in the stable ontology yet? If not, can the property be incorporated into the pleiades ontology? As it is, our data are floating out in semantic purgatory."

So define it in pleiades.

@ewg118
Copy link

ewg118 commented May 15, 2018

There are still one or two examples of GeoJSON polygons encoded into the osgeo:asGeoJSON property in Nomisma. This has come up recently on the linked.art slack channel. The asGeoJSON property is still not in the Ordnance Survey ontology, which does not even appear to be actively maintained anymore. It would be extremely useful to have some sort of property for encoding the GeoJSON as a literal, as GeoJSON support is more broad than WKT at this point.

@ewg118
Copy link

ewg118 commented May 15, 2018

What about adding a property into the GeoJSON-LD ontology itself, @sgillies? Such as geojson:featuresLiteral

@sgillies
Copy link
Member

@ewg118 it's a good idea, but I can't reopen GeoJSON-LD for revision any time soon.

@ewg118
Copy link

ewg118 commented May 15, 2018

Is there anything to do other than updating the RDF ontology and the documentation pages?

@sgillies
Copy link
Member

Two more things at least, @ewg118:

  • update PURL records
  • write to relevant lists for comments and 👍 or 👎

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link
Author

Adding an opaque geojson literal would be great since structured geojson-ld doesn't capture lists properly

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants