Rebuilt long beer example.

[oldskeptic]

This refactors the long ACME Brewery according to all the changes in SOSA and follows the new file layout.

[dr-shorthair]

Preview: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/sdw-sosa-ssn/LongExampleAcme/ssn/index.html#beerTemp

[dr-shorthair]

C.1.1 Packaging and initial storage

1. Is <acmePorterSixPack> an individual or a class?
   In the first mention <acmePorterSixPack> a beer:Porter, gs1:Product, schema:Product . it is an individual, unless beer:Porter, gs1:Product, schema:Product are sub-classes (rather than instances) of owl:Class. But a few lines lower down <10/PO202402/21/0001/acmePorterSixPack> rdfs:subClassOf <acmePorterSixPack> . it behaves like a class.
2. It looks like you reused the classes from 8.12 Complex devices e.g. sensor:IBS-TH2-Plus-H - good! However, you have tied <12345/HumiditySensor> and <12345/TemperatureSensor> to <12345/someTH2> using sosa:hosts which makes latter a Platform. In 8.12 Complex devices it is a System with sub-systems.
3. Could <00001/packingSixPack> be modeled as a sosa:Deployment, either in addition to or instead of prov:Activity?

[maximelefrancois86]

broken Fig 52 ?

[oldskeptic]

1. Is <acmePorterSixPack> an individual or a class?
   In the first mention <acmePorterSixPack> a beer:Porter, gs1:Product, schema:Product . it is an individual, unless beer:Porter, gs1:Product, schema:Product are sub-classes (rather than instances) of owl:Class. But a few lines
   lower down <10/PO202402/21/0001/acmePorterSixPack> rdfs:subClassOf <acmePorterSixPack> . it behaves like a class.

Both. This is a untidy corner of both schema.org and gs1 product. In Page 115 of the GS1 Digital Link Standard, it must be a class because of the relationships between lots / serial numbers. It's an instance of schema:IndividualProduct in schema.org land. The problem is also reviewed in gs1/WebVoc#38. I'm comfortable leaving it as both in this particular example, I added a schema:IndividualProduct type to make the distinction clear.

Commercial implementation (me) run into this issue every day. Do you think that a short explanatory blurb would be beneficial in the long example?

2. It looks like you reused the classes from 8.12 Complex devices e.g. sensor:IBS-TH2-Plus-H - good! However, you have tied <12345/HumiditySensor> and <12345/TemperatureSensor> to <12345/someTH2> using sosa:hosts which makes latter a Platform. In 8.12 Complex devices it is a System with sub-systems.

Fixed.

3. Could <00001/packingSixPack> be modeled as a sosa:Deployment, either in addition to or instead of prov:Activity?

A version of this is done in "C.1.4.1 Recording data and sensor tasking through sensor deployments".

[oldskeptic]

broken Fig 52 ?

It's rendering properly locally here. What breakage are you seeing?

[ldesousa]

Besides the individual comments there are two broad aspects to consider:

1. Use of predicates: better to stick to the intended use.
2. TTL documents: each should be a contained asset, including all individual declarations necessary. In alternative encapsulate recurrent individuals (e.g. sensors) in their own document, to be then "imported" with @prefix.

[oldskeptic]

To be moved to a markdown example.

[oldskeptic]

...it was the night before Christmas and all through the repo, nothing was stirring, not even an issue...

[dr-shorthair]

@oldskeptic to tighten up the section at the top of the md document to more strongly draw attention to punning, merging OWL with schema.org and GS1 concerns.
Work with @rob-metalinkage

[ldesousa]

I only request changes for the various typos in the Markdown documents. Otherwise, I am fine with merging, even if none of my comments on the RDF are addressed.

[dr-shorthair]

A few minor issues from @ldesousa should still be considered.

[dr-shorthair]

@oldskeptic a few small outstanding questions from Luis.

@sgrellet @KathiSchleidt @rob-metalinkage @ldesousa could you look at this pr please? Needs one review.

[ldesousa]

@oldskeptic a few small outstanding questions from Luis.

@sgrellet @KathiSchleidt @rob-metalinkage @ldesousa could you look at this pr please? Needs one review.

My comments from last week are now outdated. Meanwhile Ted reviewed the text. I am happy if you merge.

[dr-shorthair]

@oldskeptic a few small outstanding questions from Luis.
@sgrellet @KathiSchleidt @rob-metalinkage @ldesousa could you look at this pr please? Needs one review.

My comments from last week are now outdated. Meanwhile Ted reviewed the text. I am happy if you merge.

Thanks @ldesousa - can you review/approve please?

Superseded