Missing constraint for Observation:madeBySensor

[shirlysteph]

minCount constraint is missing. The documentation mentions sosa:Observation sosa:madeBySensor EXACTLY 1

[cogan-shimizu]

Yes, but my understanding is that we did not want to actually state that there is always a materialized sensor. For example, there are no materialized sensors in the SSURGO, storm, or earthquake datasets, yet we still model them as observations. --cog

…

---------- Cogan Shimizu Postdoctoral Fellow Data Semantics Laboratory (https://daselab.cs.ksu.edu/) Kansas State University (https://k-state.edu/) Homepage (https://coganshimizu.com/)

________________________________ From: Shirly Stephen ***@***.***> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 10:53 AM To: KnowWhereGraph/KWG-SHACL ***@***.***> Cc: Subscribed ***@***.***> Subject: [KnowWhereGraph/KWG-SHACL] Missing constraint for Observation:madeBySensor (Issue #11) This email originated from outside of K-State. minCount constraint is missing. The documentation mentions sosa:Observation sosa:madeBySensor EXACTLY 1 — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#11>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADMMKNKHHGFELZ3PD6OMER3UHQ7HNANCNFSM5GG7ZOZA>. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.

[shirlysteph]

Sounds good to me, Then we should point that out in a use-case - just briefly add few sentences for SSURGO. Because this a constraint that is different from what the SOSA RDF documentation mentions, but we do not capture in SHACL., so need an explanation as to why. Or maybe it is already mentioned somewhere in the paper and I cannot find it.

[cogan-shimizu]

I haven't had a chance to look at these in the paper since Friday. I'm mostly communicating ad hoc at the moment.
However, it was my understanding that there are already many of these tradeoffs already made beyond this, e.g. phenomenonTime and resultTime, hasResult and hasSimpleResult, etc.
Based on my draft of the introduction (not sure if it's changed) I never promised that sosa-shacl is a 1-1 translation and indeed said that the paper discusses these tradeoffs.

I'll be able to take a look tomorrow if someone doesn't do it already.

[zhurui0509]

Yes. That is something how our shapes are different than SOSA. I wrote a section about it as well. Check Section 4.3: Implicit sosa:Sensor.