From time to tine the group has had discussions and notes on Geospatial topics.
Some members of the Ontology community participated in the
June 20 -22, 2006 event at NSF – on “Open Collaboration: Networking Geospatial Information Technology for Interoperability and Spatial Ontology”
Based on this a Community of Practice was set up to encourage work on geospatial Ontology.
We took the name SOCoP and have been holding monthly meetings, organizing demos and workshops .
We are planning our 2nd annual this November at MITRE and I’ll have an official announcement about this soon.
But I wanted to ask this community about a topic that we plan to discuss there.
The topic is one of “frameworks” and/or “Reference Models” (RM) for geospatial ontology.
Frameworks abound in traditional IT model and IT architecture areas. These are used to define standard model products, methodology, relevant tools, best practices
Open Geospatial Consortium Inc. (OGC) has a reference model (http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/orm) that “describes the OGC Standards Baseline focusing on relationships between” the baseline standard
documents. The OGC Standards Baseline consists of the approved OpenGIS® Abstract and Implementation Standards.
Carl Reed and Deb MacPherson have talked a bit about OGC things on this forum. A naive approach to creating a geospatial RM might be to take the OGC model as
a start and “add formal semantics.”
My starting question is what people know about such Frameworks and RM’s and what their opinion on the practicality of this is. The Semantic Web stack is perhaps
a place to look for some RM ideas, but it is not clear if this is the best place to start.
Is that a good idea and has anyone made significant process in doing that?
Any thoughts appreciated.
SOCoP Executive Secretary
Portions of earlier “discussions”
Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:28:24 -0400
Thank you Carl, I will forward this to some folks to avoid duplication of
effort and look forward to reading the OGC materials provided.
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] International Alliance for Interoperability
Jumping into the middle of the discussion, but 2 years ago the OGC did a really
interesting OGC Web Services interoperability test bed scenario in this
domain. On-line interactive demonstrations can be found at
check out the "About OWS
4" and then go to "Demonstrations" and then click on the "Emergency Response"
scenario. The scenario was defined by a collaborative group of individuals from
the geospatial, CAD, building/BIM, and emergency services community. The work
was coordinated with the BIM community. There is also a really good OGC paper
on this topic area that can be freely downloaded from the OGC website (dated
My take is that there is a considerable amount of useful information and
lessons learned available through the OGC interoperability activities.
FYI, the OGC is also closely collaborating with the buildingSmart alliance on
another interoperability activity.
There is also a W3C incubator activity looking at ontologies for emergency
From: "Deborah MacPherson" <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] the case for an open research group
> Yes, I was thinking about all three: address, coordinates, reference
> to other locations as all signifying one same location in three
> different ways.
> Please send links on standards I am dying of curiosity.
> Thank you,
> Debbie MacPherson
> On 1/15/07, Carl Reed OGC Account <creed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Deborah's use of the word "location" triggered an alert in my mind. By
>> location, are you referring to an address, a location defined by
>> coordinates, or a location defined by reference or all three? The reason
>> ask is that there is a tremendous amount of standards work already done
>> allows simple _expression_ of location. There is also an excellent standard
>> for expressing location and temporal location. Finally, there is also
>> really strong standards work related to using web accessible registries
>> allow harvesting, maintenance, and discovery of location enabled
>> Carl Reed
>> Open Geospatial Consortium
Sunday, October 08, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Top 5 Ontology Driven Applications
Rex Brooks and I are planning an Ontolog Forum Panel on Emergency Response in mid-January, 2007. The more info, the better frameworks, and hopefully semantic interoperability between Alerting Domains.
I live in Huntington Beach, California. Are you confusing me with Dave McComb, who does have a consulting firm,
www.SemanticArts.com in old town, Ft. Collins, Co?
From: "Carl Reed OGC Account" <creed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 11:24 AM
To: bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Top 5 Ontology Driven Applications
I have been tied up the last several weeks getting ready for and running the recent OGC Technical Committee meetings (DC last week) so I did not have time to
really follow this thread and look at the list.
A couple of comments -
1. CAP (Common Alerting Protocol), EDXL, and other alerting standards all fall into a higher level simply titled Alerting. There is considerable work being done
on a variety of standards that can be used for citizen to authority and authority to citizen alerting. The OGC, OASIS, IETF, 3GPP, OMA, and the ITU are all working on various aspects of the value chain for alerting. Most of the use cases driving alerting
have to do with emergency services (from E-911 to response). Also, as such, these standards do not belong in health care but perhaps more appropriately in a bin called emergency management.
2. The OGC has an Information Community and Semantics Working group. They are currently rewriting their charter based on input from a joint incubator project
being done with the W3C on Geospatial Semantics. The OGC has been involved in a variety of geospatial semantics projects over the years and many of our members have worked on ontologies/taxonomies in several information communities. A current example is our
collaboration with the TDWG Spatial Data Subgroup (TDWG = International Working Group on Taxonomic Databases).
Finally, given that we appear to both be located in Fort Collins, perhaps we could meet sometime and talk about ontologies and the work of the OGC and our membership.
Keeping you up to speed on happenings in the world of DAML
Tuesday, April 1, 2003 =96 Issue10
Geospatial Ontology Initiative Underway
An ad-hoc working group is developing a DAML geospatial ontology. The
goals of the effort are be to produce an ontology that would: (1) Enable
general, though not necessarily efficient, reasoning about spatial
concepts, (2) Link with more efficient specialized reasoning engines for
spatial reasoning, (3) Link with the numerous databases that exist
containing a wealth of specific, e.g.,geographical, spatial information,
(4) Support convenient query capabilities for spatial information. An
archived mail list has been set up to facilitate discussion related to