[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] Fw: Fw: GPS coordinates in an ontology?

To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "sean barker" <sean.barker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:49:12 +0100
Message-id: <1F87F97860764D69A83FC09E28272E73@SMB>
 Just to add to the problem, it is interesting to compare the position of
 Berlin according to various sources:    (01)

 Displayed as N52 31'27", E13  24'37", and 52.52437 13.41053
  http://sws.geonames.org/2950159/    (02)

 New York Times 52.6166667, 13.4 as geo: lat, long
 http://data.nytimes.com/N50987186835223032381    (03)

 DBpedia - 52.500557, 13.398889 as geo:lat long
 AND  52 30' 2" 13 23' 56"    as dbpprop:latd, latm, lats, longd, longm, 
longs    (04)

 http://dbpedia.org/resource/Berlin    (05)

 Freebase 52.52334 13.41269, contained by Germany, Europe
     http://rdf.freebase.com/ns/guid.9202a8c04000641f80000000000094d6    (06)

 The positions agree within about 1 km in longitude, but in longitude the
 variation is of the order of 10 km.    (07)

 Sean Barker
 Bristol, UK    (08)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris
> Partridge
> Sent: 26 October 2010 12:46
> To: '[ontolog-forum] '
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fw: GPS coordinates in an ontology?
>                    *** WARNING ***
>  This message has originated outside your organisation,
>  either from an external partner or the Global Internet.
>      Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> Hi,
> Ian mentions below I had done some work in this area.
> As Sean said earlier, it is useful to distinguish between the object
> being represented and its representation.
> As Ian points out below, it can take some effort to be sure what object
> is being presented.
> The team found that it is often geo-spatial (all three dimensions) and
> temporal data - rather than just spatial data that is of interested (at
> least in the defence domain we were working in). We are often interested
> in the things that stay in the same place (place? See Aristotle for more
> details) over time.
> Maybe because we have a 4D bias :-) we found a 4D approach useful.
> I give some pointers to the 4D approach below.
> A geo-spatial (all three dimensions) and temporal position (point) is a
> point in 4D.
> So (as Ian says below) if we were not interested in the temporal
> co-ordinate
> - in programming terms, it was stripped out - then we have a point in 3D
> (with an associated time) and a line in 4D.
> If  (as Ian says below) we were not interested in the altitude
> co-ordinate - in programming terms, it was stripped out - then we have a
> line in 3D (with an associated time) and 4D.
> There were the standard issues about whether the line was the tangent to
> the normal of some reference ellipsoid or through some notional centre
> of the earth.
> If we were not interested in either the altitude  or temporal
> co-ordinates, then we have a line in 3D and a plane in 4D.
> Interestingly we found that taking the 4D approach revealed some
> potential improvements in airspace management.
> We were interested and amused to find the term 4DATM (4D Air Traffic
> Management) is in use - whereas from our perspective this follows the
> traditional 3D + 1 approach (i.e. it is not 4D in our sense of the
> word).
> Our take on this was that this recognised the importance of looking at
> space and time together (for things like ATM) but did not make the
> (paradigm?) shift from 3D + 1 to 4D.
> Regards,
> Chris
snip     (09)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (010)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>