[Auscope-geosciml] GeologicSpecimen - (Re: Which O&M version for GeoSciML - a follow up) [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au
Mon Oct 19 21:36:08 EDT 2009


Hi Bruce,

The previous email between me and Gilly is attached.  I haven't received any comment from anyone else.  I'll put the email correspondence on to the Twiki.

1. The attached email outlines Gilly's reason for creating GeologicSpecimen/materialClass - basically just constraining it more from GenericName (in O&M) to ScopedName (in GeoSciML).  I am a bit ambivalent as to the benefit of doing this - I'll let you and Gilly discuss if you want to.

2. The scope notes for GeologicSpecimenType are:

"GeologicSpecimenType describes the broad range of specialised geologic specimens.
eg:
outcrop specimen,
float specimen,
drill core,
rock chips,
drilling mud,
dredge sample,
thin section,
powder,
mineral separate,
mineral grain,
mineral grain mount,
probe burn spot .
Use the samplingMethod property to provide more details of how the sampleType was obtained."

The scope notes for GeologicSamplingProcess are:

"Use GeologicSamplingProcess to indicate the process used to obtain or create the GeologicSpecimen. eg:
diamond drilling
percussion drilling
piston core drilling
vibro core drilling
channel sampling
sea floor dredging
crushing
mineral separation
melting."

I (and the GA databases) think they are two separate concepts that need description.

3. On a related issue, I think we need to relace geotime:GeochronSpecimen with gsml:GeologicSpecimen.

Cheers,
Ollie

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ollie Raymond
National Advice,  Maps and Standards Project
Geoscience Australia

Address: GPO Box 378, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia | ABN: 80 091 799 039
Ph: (02) 62499575 | Fax: (02) 62499992 | Email: Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au
Web:  http://www.ga.gov.au/minerals/research/national/nat_maps/nat_geol_maps.jsp<http://www.ga.gov.au/geoscience/national>

Google Map<http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=canberra+australia&ie=UTF8&ll=-35.344028,149.158362&spn=0.007684,0.016404&t=h&z=17&iwloc=addr&om=1>

-- This message was created with 100% recycled electrons --


-----Original Message-----
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Guillaume.Duclaux at csiro.au
Sent: Tuesday, 20 October 2009 12:27 PM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [Auscope-geosciml] Which O&M version for GeoSciML - a follow up [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi guys,

Bruce, couple of emails have been exchanged on the mailing list in regards of the GeologicSpecimen model.
The discussion isn't resolved but as Ollie addressed the cardinality issue I pointed out in my last message, this new version sounds fine with me.

Also, Ollie gave a clear definition of the geologicSpecimenType property he defined in the model.

Cheers

Gilly


________________________________________________

Dr Guillaume Duclaux
Structural Geologist /  Modeller
CSIRO Exploration and Mining
Visiting address: ARRC, 26 Dick Perry Av., Kensington WA 6151
Postal address: PO Box 1130, Bentley WA 6102, Australia
Ph: + 61 8 6436 8728    Fax: + 61 8 6436 8555    Web: www.csiro.au<http://www.csiro.au/>





-----Original Message-----
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Bruce.Simons at dpi.vic.gov.au
Sent: Tuesday, 20 October 2009 11:50 AM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [Auscope-geosciml] Which O&M version for GeoSciML - a follow up [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]


Hi Ollie,
I'm happy with the change.

However, was the discussion with Guillame regarding the need for GeologicSpecimen resolved?

The latest .eap model looks like it has replaced Gilly's classes with just two GeologicSpecimen and SamplingProcess. I don't recall discussion on this decision.  Is therea TWiki page where it is documented?

I question the need for the GeologicSpecimen class.

1. As GeologicSpecimen a specialisation of Specimen,  why does materialClass need to be specialised?
2. GeologicSpecimenType - Again I don't see the need for a specific GeoSciML property. All specimens should potentially have this property which I believe is covered by the samplingMethod property.

[cid:image001.gif at 01CA5181.DFD43D60]

Bruce

GeoScience Victoria
EARTH RESOURCES DIVISION
Department of Primary Industries
Melbourne, Victoria
AUSTRALIA
Ph: +61-3-9658 4502
Fax: +61-3-9658 4555
Mobile: +61 429 177155

<Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au>
Sent by: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au

19/10/2009 03:09 PM
Please respond to
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au


To

<auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au>

cc



Subject

[Auscope-geosciml] Which O&M version for GeoSciML - a follow up        [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]










Hi Modellers,

Back in August, I didn't get any feedback from anyone except Simon about the implications of changes for GeologicSpecimens and SurveyProcedure between the old OGC and new ISO versions of O&M.

The one main difference for us I think is that there would be no direct link in ISO O&M from GeologicSpecimen to SurveyProcedure.  This means you have to encode a related spatial sampling feature (like a sampling point outcrop or a sampling curve borehole) to deliver survey details for a specimen.  Personally, I have softened my initial concerns with the OGC-to-ISO change - a specimen should logically come from an outcrop or a borehole or some other related sampling device.

Is everyone OK with this change, and we can move GeologicSpecimen to the new ISO version of O&M?

Cheers,
Ollie

ISO O&M class diagram:
[cid:image002.jpg at 01CA5181.DFD43D60]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ollie Raymond
National Advice,  Maps and Standards Project
Geoscience Australia

Address: GPO Box 378, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia | ABN: 80 091 799 039
Ph: (02) 62499575 | Fax: (02) 62499992 | Email: Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au
Web:  http://www.ga.gov.au/minerals/research/national/nat_maps/nat_geol_maps.jsp<http://www.ga.gov.au/geoscience/national>

Google Map<http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=canberra+australia&ie=UTF8&ll=-35.344028,149.158362&spn=0.007684,0.016404&t=h&z=17&iwloc=addr&om=1>

-- This message was created with 100% recycled electrons --


-----Original Message-----
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Simon Cox
Sent: Saturday, 1 August 2009 12:37 AM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [Auscope-geosciml] An O&M question - Survey Details and location of Specimen [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

1. because the ISO 19156 version of O&M will have a few significant changes relative to the OGC O&M, I have rebuilt the OGC O&M as an independent package within HollowWorld.
This allows you to choose which version you use. If you prefer O&M v1.0, then you can use that.
2. ISO 19156 O&M is now in the hands of the ISO 19156 Editting Committee. I am the editor, but from now on can only respond to change requests submitted formally in response to calls as part of the ISO process, or through the OGC O&M v2.0 SWG. SO if there are any changes you would like to see, you should realise that there is a formal process to get these in.
3. As part of the process of updating O&M for submission to ISO, there was some refactoring. Specimen and LocatedSpecimen were collapsed into one class, with an optional samplingLocation.
Spatial sampling features were refactored into an independent branch. It seemed to make sense to associate the survey procedure with spatial samplign features, so as you note it is no longer available on Specimen. I don;t have a strong feeling about this, but in general try to minimize the appearance of 'optional' properties.

Simon

------------------------------------------------------
Simon Cox

European Commission, Joint Research Centre,
Institute for Environment and Sustainability,
Spatial Data Infrastructures Unit, TP 262
Via E. Fermi, 2749, I-21027 Ispra (VA), Italy
Tel: +39 0332 78 3652
Fax: +39 0332 78 6325
e-mail: simon.cox at jrc.ec.europa.eu<mailto:simon.cox at jrc.ec.europa.eu>

SDI Unit: http://sdi.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
IES Institute: http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
JRC: http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
------------------------------------------------------



________________________________

From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au
Sent: Wednesday, 29 July 2009 07:43
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [Auscope-geosciml] An O&M question - Survey Details and location of Specimen [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
A question mainly for Simon, but others as well....

The latest O&M/Sampling schema allows me to encode a samplingLocation of a Specimen without the need to locate it using a related SpatialSamplingFeature (like an outcrop or drillhole).

However, Specimen has no direct link to SurveyProcedure (like who collected it, location accuracy, datum etc).  To access the SurveyProcedure for a located specimen, I still have to encode a related SpatialSamplingFeature (eg, a SamplingPoint which also has mandatory location data) and repeat the location information that I have just encoded for Specimen/samplingLocation.

Should there be a direct association between Specimen and SurveyProcedure to cater for located specimens?  Then you wouldn't have to encode a related SpatialSamplingFeature which I presume was the original idea behind adding samplingLocation to Specimen?

Cheers,
Ollie





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20091020/6c5ac0e6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 54745 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20091020/6c5ac0e6/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 25510 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20091020/6c5ac0e6/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: <Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au>
Subject: RE: [Auscope-geosciml] Proposed GeologicSpecimen amendments following Quebec [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 14:41:36 +1100
Size: 423796
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20091020/6c5ac0e6/attachment.eml>


More information about the GeoSciML mailing list