input from CRMgeo? about geosemantics-dwg HOT 13 OPEN

Thank you @mathib for raising the issue. In the cultural heritage sector we definitively have use cases involving CRMgeo and the recording of spatiotemporal regions and their diverse extent in time (one example of how we model historical region extent here). We will be happy to discuss further. I will also ping the main person behind CRMgeo and see if he can join.

from geosemantics-dwg.

Thanks @mathib, it was interesting for me to read what the CRM community's added to GeoSPARQL! My guess is that this work can inform GeoSPARQL enhancements that also use OWL TIME with GeoSPARQL's spatial.

I've added a Pull Request for a documented version of the CRMgeo v1.4 to that Erlangen repository:

• erlangen-owl version of CRMgeo v1.4

from geosemantics-dwg.

Sorry for the delay and thanks for the ping. I just contacted Gerald Hiebel and pointed him to the issue. I am sure he will show up soon (currently CIDOC-CRM meeting, but soon thereafter)

from geosemantics-dwg.

Hi All,
thank you for taking CRMgeo into account. I would be very happy to be part of the discussion related to GeoSPARQL 2.0 as I believe there could be an interesting exchange and we have some use cases in cultural heritage and archaeology that could be relevant.
I started discussing with Nicola and Günther Görz about a new version of CRMgeo where Günther created the 1.4 version in OWL.
Because of the changes in CIDOC CRM integrating lately relevant concepts and properties of CRMgeo I was reluctant to create a new version. But now CRM 7.0 is on the way and should be the standard for some time. So it would make sense to issue a new version of CRMgeo taking into account the new concepts and properties of CIDOC CRM 7.0.
Taking into account developments of GeoSPARQL 2.0 would be perfect and I am very interested in joining the discussion.
All the best for the time being,
Gerald

from geosemantics-dwg.

One area in which cultural heritage might deliver interesting requirements is support for coordinate reference systems that aren't in use any longer (historic CRSs).

from geosemantics-dwg.

It would be interesting if @ncarboni could bring the CRMgeo people to the table, as they might add another perspective on the subject of geospatial information in a Linked Data context! Would be great if we could also unify the concerns of domains other than the pure geospatial/survey use cases, such as construction and heritage :)

from geosemantics-dwg.

Question (perhaps for @mathib in order to address and close this issue): should we then add CRMgeo to the list of other activities in the Collaboration section of the GeoSPARQL SWG charter? Do we know people who could act as liaisons?

from geosemantics-dwg.

Hi @mathib, Thanks for your message I will propose something to add about CRMGeo in the GeoSPARQL SWG charter.
There are some issues that would be very interesting for our work on of the pressing things is "Extending GeoSPARQL by defining more vector literal types #6" but other issues related to 3D, 4D and metadata (RDF*) are very interesting too.
Best, Gerald

from geosemantics-dwg.

Hi @geraldhiebel, indeed there's a pressing need for a much wider support for existing 2D and 3D geometry formats. I also mentioned it in https://github.com/opengeospatial/geosemantics-dwg/issues/50, with a perspective from the construction industry. Looking forward to your contribution

from geosemantics-dwg.

this could be added to "other related activities" section?

from geosemantics-dwg.

I'm not connected to CRMgeo, so maybe @ncarboni can help us here? In the doc of CRMgeo, I see the following people listed: Contributors: Gerald Hiebel, Martin Doerr, Øyvind Eide and Maria Theodoridou and others

from geosemantics-dwg.

hi @geraldhiebel! That sounds good! Would you like to add some piece of info on CIDOC CRM/CRMgeo group in the GeoSPARQL SWG charter, under section "8.2 Similar or Applicable Standards Work (OGC and Elsewhere)"? This includes liasons (you and maybe others?), source repositories (erlangen and/or plain RDFS versions?), website of the group and a short description of the scope of the group activities.

You can find the charter in this repo and you can propose changes via change requests 😃

from geosemantics-dwg.

Great and thanks for pointing me to #50, very interesting!

from geosemantics-dwg.