[Auscope-geosciml] RE : CGI Value abomination [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Stephen M Richard
steve.richard at azgs.az.gov
Thu Sep 3 15:35:44 EDT 2009
The xlink:href to controlled concepts only works for elements that take
a ControlledConcept as a value (and allow byReference); scopedName is
the link to controlledConcept when the element takes CGI_TermValue,
which has a value, which is a ScopedName, which we want to point at a
The URI for the concept is unique, and the CGI identifier scheme
actually includes the classifierScheme in the URN, so including the
classifierScheme as the codespace for the concept is indeed redundant.
If the classifierScheme URI were easier to resolve it would be a
convenience. Better yet, perhaps we invent some sort of 'resolvable
identifier' that includes an attribute which is the URL for a resolver?
note that the codespace here is "urn:ietf:rfc:2141", because the
identifier is a URN. The classifierScheme is
"urn:cgi:classifierScheme:CGI:Lithology:200811", which can be derived
from the URN. This sort of scheme would require that the data consumer
knows the correct requests to make to the service to get a term
definition or language localization, which would be greatly facilitated
if there was some standard vocabulary service specification...
Boisvert, Eric wrote:
> Can't someone remind me why we have apparently 2 ways to refered to ControlledConcept ?
> The xlink:href and the ScopesName. I vaguely remember that if a scopeName contains certains urn, the value must contains a urn.
>> in that case is the URI for the concept, the codespace is the URI for the containing vocabulary
> Aren't urn unique anyway ?. Isn't the first urn redundant (or it's just a 'trigger' ?)
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] De la part de Stephen M Richard
> Envoyé : 3 septembre 2009 14:34
> À : Simon Cox
> Cc : auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
> Objet : Re: [Auscope-geosciml] RE : CGI Value abomination [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
> ScopedName is intended to account for controlled concepts, but we need to make it clear that the 'name' in that case is the URI for the concept, the codespace is the URI for the containing vocabulary (or do we pick a different convention?), and establish an operational way to resolve these URI's. These are application profile and architecture issues.
> Simon Cox wrote:
>> Yes - I still strongly urge y'all to attempt a 'cull' of the
>> soft-typed values, and replace them with ScopedName (this _is_
>> ControlledConcept Steve!) or Measure wherever possible.
>> As Eric points out, you can actually write filters against those.
>> 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
>> mailto:simon.cox at jrc.ec.europa.eu
Stephen M. Richard
Section Chief, Geoinformatics
Arizona Geological Survey
416 W. Congress St., #100
Tucson, Arizona, 85701 USA
Office: (520) 209-4127
Reception: (520) 770-3500
FAX: (520) 770-3505
email: steve.richard at azgs.az.gov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the GeoSciML