Issues on the ontology raised by Alberto Abella through Marina Aguado

[ednaru]

1. There is a Range
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int
   whereas all the rest is
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer

2. There is a Range
   http://www.opengis.net/ont/geosparql#wktLiteral that when accessed takes you to http://www.opengis.net/spec/geosparql/1.0/req/geometry-extension/wkt-literal that is restricted to members of the consortium.

3. These properties do not have domain. Is this right or is there a reason for this modelling decision?

• 'linearCoordinate'
• 'relativePosition'
• 'tsiCompliant'
• 'companyCodeCategory',
• 'netElement',
• 'notApplicable',
• 'notYetAvailable',
• 'operatingLanguage',
• 'operationalRegimeType',
• 'signallingSystemType',

4. These properties only have a "header"

• 'identifier', (twice)
• 'url'
• 'name'
• 'nick'

[ednaru]

Answer to this issue:

1. There is a Range
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int
   whereas all the rest is
   http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer

The properties where the range is xsd:int are:

• Cant deficiency
• Temperature range (Maximum)
• Temperature range (Minimum)
  These three parameters have values that are signed integers, therefore the use of xsd:int.

2. There is a Range
   http://www.opengis.net/ont/geosparql#wktLiteral that when accessed takes you to http://www.opengis.net/spec/geosparql/1.0/req/geometry-extension/wkt-literal that is restricted to members of the consortium.

Testing the access of http://www.opengis.net/ont/geosparql#wktLiteral , I am redirected to this link https://opengeospatial.github.io/ogc-geosparql/geosparql11/geo.ttl#wktLiteral

3. These properties do not have domain. Is this right or is there a reason for this modelling decision? Some of the points require checks and the ontology will be modified accordingly.

• 'linearCoordinate': This legacy property seems to be a generalization of the kilometer in Railway Location. Will check if it can be deprecated as it is not present in the current KG.
• 'relativePosition': Related to the previous property. Same answer than above.
• 'tsiCompliant': This property has been already deprecated.
• 'companyCodeCategory': This property refers to the type of railway company. This was a more recent requirement. Will check if a domain can be added.
• 'netElement': This property has been already deprecated.
• 'notApplicable': This property points to the name of a property (not to an instance), so it does not make sense to define a Range. For example, a triple would be: <era-track:trackabc era:notApplicable era:ETCSSystemCompatibility>
• 'notYetAvailable': The same argument as above
• 'operatingLanguage'. The definition taken from the Routebook legal text does is not clear as to which class does this property apply. Once the experts define this, the domain may be added to the ontology.
• 'operationalRegimeType': Will check if this property can apply to a Track
• 'signallingSystemType'. The same as above

[ednaru]

Changes have been applied to the ontology (not yet published)

• 'signallingSystemType' has been now deprecated bcause it is part of the definition of operational regime and there is not a separate property in the legal text.
• 'operationalRegimeType' as 'operating language' is part of the heading "1.1.0.0.1 Route book specific parameters
  (Specifical technical characteristics)" in the latest legal text, so it is not clear to which concept does it apply to in the ontology. No domain will be added.
• companyCodeCategory is a property of org:Organization which is a reused class. No domain is specified following Reuse good practices. (It could be stated as equivalent to org:classification, this change needs further discussion)
• 'linearCoordinate' and 'relativePosition' have been deprecated

[albertoabellagarcia]

ok, the ontology has been mapped in the smart data models in he subject dataModel.ERA. We also provide credit to the original authors.
Please let me know when changes are done to update the mapping.

[gatemezing]

Dear @albertoabellagarcia, how do you handle the versioning?