Hello,
I would like to express a composition relationship. Something like:
A Country consist of Provinces
A Province consists of Municipalities
I thought this should be straightforward because this is a common and
logical kind of relationship, but I could not find a vocabulary which
allows be
Hey Frans,
Dublin Core Terms has some general properties for this:
dct:hasPart http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-hasPart
dct:isPartOf http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-isPartOf
Martynas
graphity.org
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Frans Knibbe | Geodan
Thank you Martynas, that seems to be just what I was looking for!
Frans
On 21-2-2013 13:54, Martynas Jusevičius wrote:
Hey Frans,
Dublin Core Terms has some general properties for this:
dct:hasPart http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-hasPart
dct:isPartOf
You could also check the GeoNames ontology, which considers administrative
subdivisions: http://www.geonames.org/ontology/documentation.html
E.G.: in the USA, level 1 administrative subdivisions are States. In Italy,
they are Regions.
It is a minor change of perspective with respect to yours.
Barry and Matteo, thank you for pointing me to the GeoNames Ontology.
Geographical containment can also be found in GeoSPARQL
(http://schemas.opengis.net/geosparql/1.0/geosparql_vocab_all.rdf):
sfContains.
I had the feeling that what I primarily needed was the logical concept
of
The contains in GeoSPARQL holds between geometries, not geographic entities,
so I don't think it would fit your needs.
You can go with GeoNames. The following query should give you the result on a
triple store (try on the FactForge endpoint or on your data once you have it):
PREFIX
I agree that one should expect (some) geographical containment(s) to
represent general partonomy; I guess geonames doesn't because there is
no canonical property for partonomy.
E.g., Geonames has:
:parentFeature a owl:ObjectProperty,
owl:TransitiveProperty;
Yes, of course it all depends on what you actually want to say:
political/administrative/geographic/geometry etc.
John Goodwin has been using
http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/spatialrelations/within
http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/ontology/spatialrelations/contains
see
On 21-2-2013 15:28, Matteo Casu wrote:
The contains in GeoSPARQL holds between geometries, not geographic entities,
so I don't think it would fit your needs.
You can go with GeoNames. The following query should give you the result on a
triple store (try on the FactForge endpoint or on your
Hi all
(with my Geonames ontology editor helmet on)
2013/2/21 Barry Norton barry.nor...@ontotext.com
I agree that one should expect (some) geographical containment(s) to
represent general partonomy; I guess geonames doesn't because there is no
canonical property for partonomy.
Well,
Thanks, Bernard, that was (supposed to be) exactly my point about 'some
types of containment', and I was trying to say later that this might
apply to some of the parentFeature sub-properties but not others.
I didn't make myself very clear though; glad you followed up.
Barry
On 21/02/13
Hi Frans,
You wrote..
*Let's say the following is known:
1) A country consists of provinces
2) For each country, the complete set of provinces is available
3) For each province the number of inhabitants is available
Could a machine answer the question Which country has the highest number
of
12 matches
Mail list logo
