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

Thu Jul 16 17:08:19 EDT 2009

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Christopher Lynnes
<Chris.Lynnes at nasa.gov>wrote:

> So you are saying it would be something like:
>
> <Keyword
>  xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
>  xmlns:role="http://someuri_root/dataset">
> OMI_A_G
> </Keyword>

No, that is not what I meant.   Ignore for the moment that I have not
reviewed WMS Schema so that this is not legal there, i.e. still need to find
the proper place for this

What I meant was that is is either an object, i.e.

<Keyword
xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" <http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink>
xlink:role="http://someuri_root#dataset <http://someuri_root/dataset>"
xlink:href="http://somecontrolled_vocabulary_uri_root#OMI_A_G" />
<http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink>

where we are representing the controlled vocab as an URI, or

<Metadata   xmlns:myns="http://someuri_root <http://someuri_root/dataset>#">
<myns:dataset>OMI_A_G</myns:dataset>
</Metadata>

where myns:dataset implies a restricted set of possible strings as values,
i.e. a controlled vocabulary.

Benno

>
>
> On Jul 16, 2009, at 4:40 PM, John Graybeal wrote:
>
>  To the best of my knowledge, the use of role and arcrole[2] within
>> xlink[1] to specify the purpose of the locator (href) attribute is
>> limited only to requiring URIs. So you can create a vocabulary that
>> describes any set of roles that you want.
>>
>> John
>>
>> [1] xlink semantics: http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/#att-method
>> [2] Role, Arcrole, and Title: http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/#link-semantics
>>
>> On Jul 16, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Benno Blumenthal wrote:
>>
>>  Hello Chris,
>>>
>>> I have not chimed in yet because I have not had a chance to review
>>> the options for metadata in WMS, and I wanted to say something
>>> precise.  Essentially if you just want controlled vocabulary, XML
>>> and RDF are quite similar (i.e. if Brian's machine tag implies a
>>> particular controlled vocabulary for the value, then you have
>>> represented the information isomorphically to using RDF objects for
>>> the concepts, and you can crosswalk).  If you want to relate two
>>> objects, the xlink is XML's version of what is native in RDF, but I
>>> think xlink is very limited as to the meanings of the connections,
>>> whereas RDF lets the connection's meaning be specified explicitly
>>> according to a convention.
>>>
>>> But meanwhile, could you explain your example more fully -- I don't
>>> understand what
>>>
>>> dataset=OMI_A_G
>>>
>>> means (you called it a relationship).
>>>
>>> Benno
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Christopher Lynnes <
>>> Chris.Lynnes at nasa.gov
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> esip-semanticweb mailing list
>>> esip-semanticweb at rtpnet.org
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-semanticweb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. M. Benno Blumenthal          benno at iri.columbia.edu
>>> International Research Institute for climate and society
>>> The Earth Institute at Columbia University
>>> Lamont Campus, Palisades NY 10964-8000   (845) 680-4450
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>

-- 
Dr. M. Benno Blumenthal          benno at iri.columbia.edu
International Research Institute for climate and society
The Earth Institute at Columbia University
Lamont Campus, Palisades NY 10964-8000   (845) 680-4450
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/esip-semanticweb/attachments/20090716/2e00dece/attachment.htm>