- From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:59:48 -0800
- To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au, maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr, jano@geog.ucsb.edu, armin.haller@anu.edu.au
- Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <8ee63dfd-6a72-a471-a432-67f13652849b@ucsb.edu>
On 02/14/2017 11:54 AM, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote: > > Kerry: ActuableProperty is also not English. What is meant here? > Perhaps an explanation of the concept would help to choose the term. > SEAS uses "Property" which suits me, but I guess we are stuck in a > pattern since we have "ObservableProperty elsewhere. SAN uses > ImpactedProperty which is certainly better, and that would also > suggest actuatedProperty could be 'impacts'. Or, better still (becuase > impacts is too forceful, in general) how about "affects" and > "AffectedProperty" > > In all this we need to preserve the distinction between the class name > and definition, and the associated property name and definition. For > observations we distinguish Observable Properties - i.e. potentially > observable by sensors - from observed properties - i.e. actually > observed in an observation. A set of *observable* properties might be > published in a list or register, for re-use in multiple observation > instances, where their role becomes *observed*. > > We need similar concepts for actuation. > > And yes, "actuable" is a new word, but is clearly related to existing > English and new coinages for specific purposes are nothing new in > technical contexts. Actionable may be an acceptable alternative, > though to me it does not carry quite the same meaning. And language is fluid; we introduce new terms (out of old terms) all the time such as 'triplification'. Jano > > Simon > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr> > *Sent:* Tuesday, 14 February 2017 7:01:44 PM > *To:* Krzysztof Janowicz; Armin Haller; Krzysztof Janowicz > *Cc:* Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton); public-sdw-wg@w3.org > *Subject:* Re: Actuation and Actuators in SOSA (issue-91) > Hi, > > I added some answers to Kerry's questions in the wiki page > https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Actuation > <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Actuation> > > > These are copied here: > > /Kerry: can we reconsider the names please? "actsOnProperty" (from > SEAS) instead of "actuatedProperty" (does not follow active property > naming convention, is not English)/ > > /- Maxime: +1 for "sosa:actsOnProperty/sosa:isActedOnBy" and > "sosa:observesProperty/sosa:isObservedBy", for the sake of having > consistent naming conventions./ > > /Kerry: ActuableProperty is also not English. What is meant here? > Perhaps an explanation of the concept would help to choose the term. > SEAS uses "Property" which suits me, but I guess we are stuck in a > pattern since we have "ObservableProperty elsewhere. SAN uses > ImpactedProperty which is certainly better, and that would also > suggest actuatedProperty could be 'impacts'. Or, better still (becuase > impacts is too forceful, in general) how about "affects" and > "AffectedProperty"/ > > /- Maxime: related emails in the > list:https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0335.htmlhttps://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0338.htmlhttps://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0339.html./ > > /- Maxime: propose: "sosa:ActionableProperty"/ > > /Kerry: What is a Phenomenontime in this context? As distinct from a > ResultTime? Why do we need it?/ > > /- Maxime: AFAIK, resultTime can be later than phenomenonTime. As an > example in the spec, maybe we could use the example of an astronomical > telescope that outputs today some phenomenon that occurred many years > ago?/ > > /Kerry: What is the impact on SSN?/ > > /- Maxime: should we duplicate any axiom that exists for Observation > and adapt it for Actuation?/ > > /- Maxime: should we decide which of the MeasurementProperty can also > apply to Actuators? As a first guess, I would say Accuracy, > ActuationLimit, Drift, Frequency, Latency, Precision, Resolution, > ResponseTime, all apply to Actuation/ > > /- Maxime: I believe all of the OperatingProperties also apply to > Actuators./ > > / > / > > / > / > > Best, > Maxime > > Le lun. 13 févr. 2017 à 10:55, Maxime Lefrançois > <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>> a écrit : > > Dear Simon, all, > > From my side, it's 'yes' to your second question. > > - if requirement 5.27[1] is sufficient to motivate the addition > of actuator/actuation, then requirement 5.16 may be sufficient to > motivate the addition of the Samping side of the system. > - as far as I know, not all of GoodRelations has been swallowed > by schema.org <http://schema.org> anyways, and this is managed by > the W3C Schema.org Community Group [2]. So it's not a 'all or > nothing' matter there. If Samping is is SOSA and the schema.org > <http://schema.org> community doesn't want sampling, then it won't > make them reject Actuation. > > +1 for Simon to create a wiki page with turtle snippets that > explain your proposal, (potentially multiple options) ? > > @Jano, could you also write turtle snippets for your proposed > alternative in the Wiki ? > > Kind regards, > Maxime > > > [1] - https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#ExSituSampling > [2] - https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg > > Le lun. 13 févr. 2017 à 08:14, Krzysztof Janowicz > <jano@geog.ucsb.edu <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu>> a écrit : > > Hi Simon, Armin, all, > > I fully agree with keeping SOSA as minimalistic as possible. > This is a key design goal. The changes I proposed are a > reaction to issue-91 and other change requests and they are > minimal in nature by only introducing one class and one > property. They are also in line with other work on actuators. > The fact, that such minimal changes were sufficient to address > the outstanding issues shows that by now SOSA seems to > stabilize and is well designed. One could even fix these > issues by an even more minimalistic change, I will implement > this tomorrow as alternative. > > As far as sampling is concerned, I absolutely agree that > Sample needs to be in SOSA. Whether it is of equal importance > compared to observations and actuations is difficult to say. > Simon, may I suggest that you create a similar example for > sampling? If all we need would be just one or two more > classes, then I would support to add it. Otherwise, we could > leave Sample in there as stub and add more axioms to the new SSN. > > More generally speaking (and leaving the sampling issue > aside), my big concern is that we will start doing this for 10 > more cases, thereby ruining the entire idea of a lightweight > SOSA. To be very clear about this, I created this proposal > because I was tasked to do so. I believe that SOSA will be > fine with said changes (as they are minimal) to better support > actuation but that SOSA would also remain valuable without > these changes. If this opens the flood gates to tons of change > requests for new classes and properties, I would strongly > prefer to leave SOSA as is. SOSA was never designed to capture > all use cases and all details in a balanced way as this is the > task of the SSN. > > > Cheers, > Jano > > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 10:11 PM, Armin Haller > <armin.haller@anu.edu.au <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>> wrote: > > I will raise the question of Sampling in the core in the > discussion around Actuation in our next telco. > > In terms of Actuation we have several use cases that > require actuation: > https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#ModelActuation I believe we > need to have a strong argument why to not include it in > the core. > > Personally, I think Actuation should be in SOSA as many > IoT applications on the Web will include Actuation. Even > many of the IoT home devices available in Apple Stores > include actuation (turning light on, recording your > favourite show over Siri, Cortana, Amazon Echo, changing > the thermostat etc.). > > On 13/2/17, 11:50 am, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" > <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote: > > Thanks Jano. > > The proposal is exactly in line with expectations. > > However, I am concerned that we should clarify the > scope (and size) of SOSA. Specifically, > 1. do the requirements for SOSA include a basic > actuation model? > > If that is the case then > 2. should the Sampling side of the system also need to > be fleshed out? > I could make a proposal for this, but had been holding > back because I had assumed that was probably out of scope > for most SOSA users, and should rather be the subject of a > vertical (richer axiomatization) + horizontal (additional > scope) extension to SOSA. > > In developing SOSA until now we have generally leaned > towards parsimony - lets minimise the number of concepts > in SOSA to a core that might be useful to schema.org > <http://schema.org> folk. > > BTW - I'm OK with the answers to these two questions > being 1. Yes, and 2. No, but wanted to put the issue on > the table so we are all clear about what is being ruled > in, and what is out. > > And just in case there is any question, even if it is > "2. No", Sample still belongs in SOSA, as it is critical > for many (most?) observations. > It would just be sampling and sample preparation that > would be delegated elsewhere. > > Simon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Krzysztof Janowicz [mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu > <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>] > Sent: Monday, 13 February, 2017 10:50 > To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; > armin.haller@anu.edu.au <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>; > public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org> > Subject: Actuation and Actuators in SOSA (issue-91) > > Dear all, > > I added a wiki pages that shows a concept map for the > changes to be made on the Actuator and Actuation side of > SOSA. The proposed changes address some shortcomings of > the current model and are also in preparation for a deeper > axiomatization in SSN. > > There are two major (but in no sense dramatic changes) > to SOSA, namely a proposal to add the > SOSA:actuatedProperty role and a class called > SOSA:ActuableProperty. These are in line with previous > work and requests made on this list. > > I hope you can look at the concept map and the notes > on the wiki page as I hope we can get this resolved during > our next teleconference. Please keep in mind that > everything that is not shown in a dashed style is already > part of SOSA. > > https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Actuation_in_SOSA > > Best, > Jano > > > > -- Krzysztof Janowicz Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2017 20:00:23 UTC