[Auscope-geosciml] Event type vocabulary? what is it [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

[Bruce.Simons at dpi.vic.gov.au]

The discussion on eventType at Quebec doesn't seem to be recorded on 
TWiki. Was it added before we added classifier to GeologicEvent and is now 
therefore redundant?

Bruce

GeoScience Victoria
AuScope Grid
Australian Spatial Research Data Commons

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
19/03/2010 09:37 AM
Please respond to
auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au


To
<auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au>, <steve.richard at azgs.az.gov>
cc

Subject
Re: [Auscope-geosciml] Event type vocabulary? what is it 
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]






Looks like my cunning plan to stimulate discussion worked....  Some 
points:
 
1.  The scope notes for eventType were only added by me a couple of days 
ago because there were none previously.  The notes are only my best guess 
at the time of what eventType might be used for.
 
2.  My concern, like John’s, is that eventType and eventProcess are very 
similar things.  As I suspected when I asked if anyone had a vocab for 
eventType, similar terms are used in both vocabularies.  That suggests to 
me that they are the same thing, and I question the need for eventType.  I 
think Bruce suggested adding eventType (apologies if my failing memory is 
incorrect), so maybe Bruce or others could outline their need for both 
eventType and eventProcess?
 
3.  Re John’s issue with easily finding the “age” of a unit now that we 
have deprecated preferredAge... I don’t see too much of a problem with 
asking users to search for 
          -  eventProcess in (‘deposition’,’intrusion’,’eruption’)    to 
get the primary age of a unit, or 
          -  eventProcess = ‘metamorphism’    to get the metamorphic age 
of a unit. 
 
Cheers,
Ollie
  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ollie Raymond
 
National Advice, Maps and Standards Project
Geoscience Australia
 
GeoSciML Design Group
IUGS Commission for the Management and Application of Geoscience 
Information
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Address: GPO Box 378, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia | ABN: 80 091 799 039
Ph: +61 2 62499575 | Fax: +61 2 62499992 | Email: Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au 
| Google Map 
National geological maps  
http://www.ga.gov.au/minerals/research/national/nat_maps/nat_geol_maps.jsp
Geoscience Australia web services  
http://www.ga.gov.au/resources/applications/ogc-wms.jsp
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 --- 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 Laxton, 
John L
Sent: Friday, 19 March 2010 3:43 AM
To: steve.richard at azgs.az.gov
Cc: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [Auscope-geosciml] Event type vocabulary? what is it
 
Steve,
 
At present data providers generally give a GeologicUnit an age and I would 
be wary about moving from this to telling users 'these are the ages of all 
the things that have happened to the rock, pick which age you want'. The 
latter approach implies that all users wanting the age of a rock will be 
aware of what the most significant event in the geologicHistory is which I 
doubt is always the case. We have to assume that our data is not just 
going to be accessed through clients under our control and with queries 
created by us.
 
Maybe asking how old a rock is isn't as simple a question as it sounds, 
but it is one we have traditionally answered and I think we need to 
continue to do so.
 
John
 
From: Stephen M Richard [mailto:steve.richard at azgs.az.gov] 
Sent: 18 March 2010 16:16
To: Laxton, John L
Cc: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [Auscope-geosciml] Event type vocabulary? what is it
 
John--I think the logic is that one would have to pose the 'how old is the 
rock' question by specifying the process of interest that defines what 
'how old' means. For sedimentary and igneous rocks, the answer is 
generally simple-- deposition, intrusion, or eruption, for altered or 
metamorphic rocks (composite genesis), the answer could be cooling, peak 
metamorphism, or protolith deposition, intrusion, or eruption. 

This issues is a good example of use of the interchange format for 
information encoding vs. a geologist-friendly query language. Same issue 
that was the basis for the recent geologic unit morphology discussion. I 
think the stored query approach with a 'common queryable' element (like 
CSW common queryables) for 'preferred age' is a better solution to the 
problem, because preferred age depends on the user in some cases (design 
decision is are there enough of these cases to allow flexibility?).

steve

On 3/18/2010 8:56 AM, Laxton, John L wrote: 
Steve,
 
I think we have got confused somewhere here! 
 
The v2 preferredAge was there to answer the question 'How old is the 
rock?'. After deprecating preferredAge in order to answer the same 
question there needs to be a way of flagging one of the events in the 
geologicHistory as being the one that is deemed to represent the age of 
the rock. I don't see how this can be achieved with a query on 
eventProcess and numericAgeDate so I don't see how Action 15 from Quebec 
follows from the decision to deprecate preferredAge. That said I don't see 
how a query on eventType would either. I think eventType may have been 
introduced simply to follow the typing pattern used elsewhere (eg 
faultType), but faultType was introduced because of the complexity of 
querying for commonly used concepts such as 'reverse fault' without such a 
property. I'm not sure there is a similar use case for eventType, and as 
you say there is a danger of confusion with eventProcess and 
eventEnvironment. I think the requirement I identified for the ability to 
relate local events to larger scale events such as orogenies is best met 
through the use of  a classifier. 
 
So:
 
1. I'm unclear of the requirement for eventType and unless there is a 
clear use case for it it might be best dropped
 
2. I'm unclear how we can replicate the preferredAge concept with 
geologicHistory
 
John
 
From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [
mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Stephen M 
Richard
Sent: 17 March 2010 17:46
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: Re: [Auscope-geosciml] Event type vocabulary? what is it
 
Yikes-- We added Classifier on event as well. That would be the logical 
place to have association of an event with a specific geologic event that 
might be reused (like Hercynian Orogeny, K-T boundary impact) and have its 
own GeologicEvent prototype description. 
So what use does that leave for EventType. The only one I can see that 
doesn't create confusion with eventProcess -  eventEnvironment is to use 
it in the sense of GeologicUnitType as a category that specifies 
variations in the content model/intention of the actual GeologicEvent 
element ('type' in the sense of data type). Examples --extended event 
(orogeny), instantaneous event (bolide impact, volcanic eruption). Maybe 
some coherent abstraction of the eventProcess vocabulary could be made to 
categorize events that have different kinds of prototype descriptions, but 
the danger is that if the eventTypes are just the broader categories from 
the eventProcess vocabulary, then its unclear which property to filter for 
those categories -- eventProcess or eventType.

steve

On 3/17/2010 9:58 AM, Stephen M Richard wrote: 

EventType property on GeologicEvent feature scope notes currently read: 
term 'to broadly categorise the type of event (e.g. depositional, 
tectonic, biological, metallogenic)'. Figuring out what should be in the 
EventType vocabulary opens a host of questions -- how to categorize 
events?, what are the use cases?. Kinds of event would be defined by 
process and environment by my reckoning, so it would appear that EventType 
would act as a short cut for some combination of eventEnvironment and 
eventProcess.

....snip...


Does eventType implements this classifier concept?  That seems like a 
potentially useful interpretation. In that case, something like the 
OneGeologyEurope OrogenicEvent vocabulary is a gsml:EventType vocabulary, 
and we get into the 'ontologic level' discussion about names, classifiers, 
types etc. (see the Dec Twiki summary to review that...). These categories 
are specific geologic events - they involve geologic process, geologic 
environment, geologic age, and geographic location.  This looks like a 
slippery slope. Does one look for the depositional age by specifying the 
eventProcess or eventType?. Does one look for structures related to the 
Laramide orogeny by specifying the GeologicEvent/gml.name, or specifying 
the EventType...

steve


snip...


-- 
Stephen M. Richard
Section Chief, Geoinformatics
Arizona Geological Survey
416 W. Congress St., #100
Tucson, Arizona, 85701 USA
 
Phone: 
Office: (520) 209-4127
Reception: (520) 770-3500 
FAX: (520) 770-3505
 
email: steve.richard at azgs.az.gov

-- 
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC 
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents 
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless 
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to 
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system. 
 
-- 
Stephen M. Richard
Section Chief, Geoinformatics
Arizona Geological Survey
416 W. Congress St., #100
Tucson, Arizona, 85701 USA
 
Phone: 
Office: (520) 209-4127
Reception: (520) 770-3500 
FAX: (520) 770-3505
 
email: steve.richard at azgs.az.gov

-- 
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC 
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents 
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless 
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to 
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system. 
_______________________________________________
Auscope-geosciml mailing list
Auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
http://lists.arcs.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/auscope-geosciml


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20100319/4c298a4b/attachment.htm>