[esip-semanticweb] [ESIP-AQ] help with marking up WMS/WCSCapability docs?

Thu Jul 16 08:23:35 EDT 2009

Hi,

See the recent http://www.w3.org/2009/06/xhtml-faq.html ).

The talk at the MIT Strata Center (Have you seen this building?  It is
fractal!) is all about HTML5.  HTML itself now includes a section on XML
serialization.  This apparently will replace XHTML: the XHTML2 group is
being decommissioned. Of note to this discussion, the FAQ cited above
states:

"RDFa is a specification for attributes to express structured data in any
markup language. W3C published RDFa as a Recommendation in October 2008, and
deployment continues to grow."

"Work will stop on these documents (likely to be published as Group Notes):

    * XHTML 2.0
    * CURIE
    * XFrames
    * HLink
    * XHTML+MathML+SVG Profile
    * XHTML Modularization 1.0 Second Edition

Note: RDFa uses CURIE technology by inclusion; the role module uses it by
reference. At this time we do not plan to publish the CURIE specification as
a stand-alone Recommendation. However, ongoing discussions of RDFa and the
role module are likely to touch on CURIE technology."

Also of note, there is a conflict of interests within W3C regarding
decentralized extensibility (like we use), as it engenders incompatible
naming schemes.  Since context cannot be adequately specified, these
alternative local naming schemes (controlled vocabularies) can not be
resolved for true interoperability without human intervention.  I assume the
W3C powers will realize that this, though unfortunate, is a necessary evil
for any progress at all.  What we are doing within our Earth science
community is a good thing and wouldn't be expected to fit the needs of, say,
Wall Street (Words like "global warming" don't really have the same
connotations for them).

Case in point, I see there is a Last Call for comments (closing August 10)
on the W3C Geolocation API Specification
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-geolocation-API-20090707/ ).  See the blurb on
the W3 home page.  Even though they use the words "to enable distributed
applications of many kinds of devices including sensors and effectors", they
are using a vocabulary somewhat askew from ours; theirs is more appropriate
to home entertainment, mobile, and automotive devices.  Even so, I don't
think it irrelevant to us, and even this discussion.

Microformats may not see as much support now that Tantek has left
Technorati.  I use vCard and vCalendar (or whatever it is), and reluctantly
FOAF and DC--FRBR and MARC (and maybe some others, whatever zotero supports)
for references--and the Getty-supported museum standard for non-web things.

Howard

PS  Interesting.  This sort of discussion would be best on the wiki, but I
probably wouldn't have seen it.  I would like to see it extended on the
wiki, though, since there are a lot of viewpoints.

-----Original Message-----
From: esip-aqcluster-bounces at rtpnet.org
[mailto:esip-aqcluster-bounces at rtpnet.org] On Behalf Of John Graybeal
Sent: July 16, 2009 Thursday 12:35 AM
To: Wilson, Brian D (335G)
Cc: Christopher Lynnes; esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org;
esip-aqcluster at rtpnet.org
Subject: Re: [ESIP-AQ] [esip-semanticweb] help with marking up
WMS/WCSCapability docs?

Can you all describe what you mean by 'machine tags'?

John

On Jul 15, 2009, at 7:02 PM, Wilson, Brian D (335G) wrote:

> Chris et al,
>
> Machine tags are certainly the fastest way to start specifying
> a controlled set of facets and values.  They can serve as a way
> to populate instances into a fuller ontology to be supplied later.
>
> I don't think RDFa is suitable for insertion into XML files.
>
> -- Brian
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: esip-aqcluster-bounces at rtpnet.org
[mailto:esip-aqcluster-bounces at rtpnet.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Christopher Lynnes
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:54 PM
> To: esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org
> Cc: esip-aqcluster at rtpnet.org; Erin Robinson
> Subject: [ESIP-AQ] help with marking up WMS/WCS Capability docs?
>
> Greetings!
>
> Over in the Air Quality Cluster, we are experimenting with using some
> kind of structured markup / tagging of OGC WMS and WCS capabilities
> documents (inside <Keyword> elements) to allow us to do structured
> searches on the documents.  An example might be, "give me the layers
> where Dataset = 'OMI_AI_G'".
Seehttp://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/WMS_GetCapabilities#WMS_GetCapabilities
_Layer_Description
>
> Thing is, we figure if we are going to try to implement this kind of
> markup with a quasi-controlled vocabulary, we should do it in such a
> way that it is compatible with or even leverages the semantic web.  We
> have pondered a machine tags approach, e.g.,
> <Keyword>esip:dataset=OMI_AI_G</Keyword>.  (A link to an initial
> attempt of a WMS that includes the current keyword encoding:
http://webapps.datafed.net/AIRNOW.ogc?service=wms&request=getCapabilities&ve
rsion=1.1.1)
> .
>
> Alternatively, we have heard RDFa mentioned for microformats, though
> mostly in the context of XHTML.  Can this be applied to OGC's XML and
> if so, how?
>
> Can the ESIP Semantic Web cluster provide a recommendation or
> suggestion in how to move forward that would be:
> (a) flexible and extensible,
> (b) compatible with the evolving ESIP datatype and services ontology  
> and
> (c) lightweight and easy to use?
> --
> Christopher Lynnes             NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2
> 301-614-5185
>
> _______________________________________________
> ESIP-AQcluster mailing list
> ESIP-AQcluster at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-aqcluster
> _______________________________________________
> esip-semanticweb mailing list
> esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb

John

--------------
John Graybeal   <mailto:graybeal at mbari.org>  -- 831-775-1956
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org

_______________________________________________
ESIP-AQcluster mailing list
ESIP-AQcluster at rtpnet.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-aqcluster