Re: ACTION-85 Use Case

Hello Bart,

You can see the updated use case here
<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#UsingSpatialDataDuringEmergencyResponseOperations>.
I changed one thing with respect to the proposal: a link to the new
requirement Subject equality
<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#SubjectEquality>
was added. It seems appropriate.

I also took the liberty of closing ACTION-85.

Regards,
Frans



On 17 August 2016 at 09:26, Bart van Leeuwen <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>
wrote:

> Hi Frans,
>
> it is good to go, I'll send it for review to some people as well.
>
> Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards
> Bart van Leeuwen
>
> ##############################################################
> # twitter: @semanticfire
> # netage.nl
> # http://netage.nl
> # Esdoornstraat 3
> # 3461ER Linschoten
> # tel. +31(0)6-53182997
> ##############################################################
>
>
>
> From:        Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
> To:        Bart van Leeuwen <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>
> Cc:        "SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org)" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
> Date:        16-08-2016 13:49
> Subject:        Re: ACTION-85 Use Case
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hi Bart,
>
> If you are good with the proposal I will make the change in the UCR
> document. Just say the word... Or would you like to see some changes in the
> proposed new use case?
>
> Regards,
> Frans
>
> On 15 August 2016 at 16:45, Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>> wrote:
> Hi Frans,
>
> I think this is a great modification, is there a place where I can edit
> this ?
>
> Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards
> Bart van Leeuwen
>
> ##############################################################
> # twitter: @semanticfire
> # *netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # *http://netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # Esdoornstraat 3
> # 3461ER Linschoten
> # tel. *+31(0)6-53182997* <%2B31%280%296-53182997>
> ##############################################################
>
>
>
> From:        Frans Knibbe <*frans.knibbe@geodan.nl*
> <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>>
> To:        Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>
> Cc:        "SDW WG (*public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>)" <
> *public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
> Date:        21-01-2016 12:04
> Subject:        Re: ACTION-85 Use Case
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hi Bart,
>
> Here is a proposal for a merged use case:
>
> *Using spatial data during emergency response operations*
>
> *Emergency response services in the Netherlands use SDIs to help manage
> large scale incidents. Predefined geographical data from their GIS
> warehouses can be used, but incidents and accidents are by nature
> unpredictable so it is impossible to determine beforehand which data are
> needed. In-house data need to be supplemented with data from other sources
> based on ad-hoc requirements. Typically, supplemental data are available
> through WxS services. This poses several problems:*
> 1.        *Third party data lack semantics in the sense of the Web of
> data. Under the umbrella of various projects a first attempt has been made
> to at least share definitions of the terminology used by various emergency
> response services, both national and cross border. This resulted in the
> start of a project called the **Firebrary* <http://www.firebrary.com/>*.
> Now the terminology and definitions are available on the Web as linked data
> as SKOS. Still linking from the spatial data to these definitions and vice
> versa is not standardized. Publication of web semantics with spatial data
> would improve discoverability of applicable data and facilitate linking
> data from separate sources.*
> 2.        *It is not possible to predefine relationships between Web data
> and data exposed through WxS services (rdfs:seeAlso is considered by many
> to be too limited).*
> 3.        *It is not easy to share all data related to an incident as Web
> data.*
>
> *Being able to plot and exchange data about active incidents through the
> Web and visualize them in GIS tools with open standards would be a huge
> leap forward for emergency response services.*
>
> *Related deliverables: best practices*
>
> *Related requirements:* *Compatibility with existing practices*
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#Compatibility>*,  **Discoverability*
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#Discoverability>*,  **Spatial metadata*
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#SpatialMetadata>*,  **Linkability*
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#Linkability>*, **Spatial relationships*
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#SpatialRelationships>
>
> I changed the title a bit so that it better covers the use case. Also, I
> have added the Spatial relationships requirement to the list of related
> requirements.
>
> About that: the bit that I have not included yet is about types of
> relationships. In the existing use case it says "*A related issue is that
> the relation between the data in the GIS warehouses is only spatial, while
> most of the time there is an administrative relation as well.*"
>
> Which GIS warehouse do you mean in this case? The GIS warehouses of the
> emergency response services or those of the third parties whose data you
> would like to use? And how is not possible to have administrative relations
> now?
>
> Regards,
>
> Frans
>
>
> 2016-01-16 18:39 GMT+01:00 Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>:
> Hi Frans,
>
> I'm sorry that I've missed this email.
>
> What I tried to explain is this, currently the emergency response services
> only use GIS services available in their GIS Warehouse ( feel free to use
> standard terms ).
> However during incidents there might be spatial data available at 3rd
> parties, this data could be in a external SDI or even in Web Data.
> Currently there is no easy way to find the data and integrate the web
> based spatial data
>
> The second part of the problem is that the spatial data which is presented
> does not contain any form of semantics as explained in my second submission.
> So even if we would be able to find and use external data ( both GIS / Web
> ) we have no clue what it exactly means.
>
> Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards
> Bart van Leeuwen
>
> ##############################################################
> # twitter: @semanticfire
> # *netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # *http://netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # Esdoornstraat 3
> # 3461ER Linschoten
> # tel. *+31(0)6-53182997* <%2B31%280%296-53182997>
> ##############################################################
>
>
>
> From:        Frans Knibbe <*frans.knibbe@geodan.nl*
> <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>>
> To:        Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>
> Cc:        "SDW WG (*public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>)" <
> *public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
> Date:        28-12-2015 14:46
> Subject:        Re: ACTION-85 Use Case
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hello Bart,
>
> In the process of trying to merge the two texts I came across something
> that seems inconsistent. In the existing use case it says* "During
> emergency response operations in the Netherlands the only spatial data
> available to emergency response services are the predefined data in their
> GIS warehouses"* and in the new text it says* "During those incidents
> they *[emergency response services]* will use a wide variety of spatial
> data created and curated by third parties"*.
>
> Are the predefined data in the GIS warehouses of the emergency response
> services the same as spatial data created and curated by third parties? Or
> are they different data sources? I hope you can clarify this.
>
> Greetings,
> Frans
>
>
>
>
> 2015-12-26 13:46 GMT+01:00 Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>:
> Hi Frans,
>
> Sounds good to me!
>
> Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards
> Bart van Leeuwen
>
> ##############################################################
> # twitter: @semanticfire
> # *netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # *http://netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # M.A. Reinaldaweg 79
> # 3461AJ Linschoten
> # tel. *+31(0)6-53182997* <%2B31%280%296-53182997>
> ##############################################################
>
>
>
> From:        Frans Knibbe <*frans.knibbe@geodan.nl*
> <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>>
> To:        Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>
> Cc:        "SDW WG (*public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>)" <
> *public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
> Date:        21-12-2015 12:10
> Subject:        Re: ACTION-85 Use Case
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hello Bart,
>
> Shall I propose a merged text for the use case here in this thread?
>
> Regards,
> Frans
>
> 2015-12-13 12:29 GMT+01:00 Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>:
> Hi Frans,
>
> Sorry, I seem to have missed this email completely.
>
> Having just one use case who covers it all is fine for me.
> How would you like to proceed on this ?
>
> Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards
> Bart van Leeuwen
>
> ##############################################################
> # twitter: @semanticfire
> # *netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # *http://netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # M.A. Reinaldaweg 79
> # 3461AJ Linschoten
> # tel. *+31(0)6-53182997* <%2B31%280%296-53182997>
> ##############################################################
>
>
>
> From:        Frans Knibbe <*frans.knibbe@geodan.nl*
> <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>>
> To:        Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>, Alejandro Llaves <*allaves@fi.upm.es*
> <allaves@fi.upm.es>>
> Cc:        "SDW WG (*public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>)" <
> *public-sdw-wg@w3.org* <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
> Date:        08-12-2015 13:55
> Subject:        Re: ACTION-85 Use Case
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> Hello Bart,
>
> I realise this use case describes something not entirely covered by *the
> existing emergency response use case*
> <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html#UsingSpatialDataFromTheWebInGISSystemsDuringEmergencyResponseOperations>,
> but do you think we could try to merge the new use case description with
> the use case already in the document? As far as I can tell, the related
> deliverable is Best Practices in both cases and requirements following from
> the use cases seem to be the same too.
>
> Regards,
> Frans
>
>
>
> 2015-11-22 21:26 GMT+01:00 Bart van Leeuwen <*bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl*
> <bart_van_leeuwen@netage.nl>>:
> Hi all,
>
> As discussed on the call last week.
> ACTION-85 is about best practices on linking WxS with linked data, I
> created a use case to explain why this is important.
>
> Use Case.
>
> Emergency response services use SDI's to help manage large scale
> incidents. During those incidents they will use a wide variety of Spatial
> data created and currated by 3rd parties. Although the data provided by
> these 3rd parties is available through standard WxS services, these
> services lack the semantics of the thematic data. Currently there is no way
> for a WxS service to expose the semantics of the features it provides in a
> web of data way.
> If WxS services could be extended to provide the references to the
> semantic meaning of the features, the usabilty of these 3rd party services
> will greatly increase.
> By exposing the feature data as web data it should in the same time
> increase the discoverabilty of this data.
>
> Requirement:
>
> Link traditional WxS features to their web data counterparts
>
>
> Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards
> Bart van Leeuwen
>
> ##############################################################
> # twitter: @semanticfire
> # *netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # *http://netage.nl* <http://netage.nl/>
> # M.A. Reinaldaweg 79
> # 3461AJ Linschoten
> # tel. *+31(0)6-53182997* <%2B31%280%296-53182997>
> ##############################################################
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>