[esip-semanticweb] help with marking up WMS/WCS Capability docs?

[Christopher Lynnes]

On Jul 15, 2009, at 6:52 PM, John Graybeal wrote:

> I am not deep in any one of these details, but I am a little familiar
> with all the possibilities you mention. So consider the following as
> notions to be verified:
>
> 1) RDFa won't fit gracefully into the OGC schema as written, because
> it is using a different set of elements (that is, it is tuned to the
> HTML elements). "To date, because XHTML is extensible while HTML is
> not, RDFa has only been specified for XHTML 1.1." [1]  The way it
> works is to add attributes, which must be in an RDFa-compatible XHTML
> schema if the document is to validate.
>
> 2) I wholeheartedly endorse the intent to use controlled vocabularies
> in a way that is compatible with the semantic web. All that should be
> necessary to do this is to find a suitable place where a URI can be
> placed.  Then you can create controlled vocabularies whose terms
> correspond to URIs. There is extensive guidance on this topic at the
> MMI site [2].  I do not know of any reason these approaches would be
> incompatible with the ESIP ontologies.
>
> 3) The way OOSTethys [1] chose to add more specific descriptions/
> references to SensorML/O&M was through the use of xlink, which is
> supported in the OGC schema. Examples are on the OOSTethys site. As
> far as I know, this is the most used OGC practice to meet this need to
> date. (Because I don't know of any other particular recommendation.)
> Note that if a standard allows a name to be specified as a URI (which
> most of the SWE standards do, yes?), that is another place where the
> sensor web.
>

Can you point me to any specific examples (i.e., URLs to files)?

I'm having some difficulty seeing how a *relationship*, like  
'dataset=OMI_A_G' can be expressed with the xlink or URI...

Thx,

>
> On Jul 15, 2009, at 12:53 PM, Christopher Lynnes wrote:
>
>> 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&version=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-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
>

--
Christopher Lynnes             NASA/GSFC, Code 610.2          
301-614-5185