[GeoJSON] Integrating GeoJSON with other kinds of data via JDIL
Allan Doyle
adoyle at eogeo.org
Fri Jun 1 08:49:52 PDT 2007
Actually, this is a legal GeoJSON object (see Rule 2: The GeoJSON
object may have any number of members (name/value pairs).):
{
"@namespaces": {"":"http://whateverthegeojsonuriturnsouttobe"}
"type": "Point",
"coordinates": [100.0, 0.0]
}
and so is this:
{
"@namespaces": {"":"http://whateverthegeojsonuriturnsouttobe",
"foo":"http://fooisgood.com"}
"@type": "foo:myhouse",
"type": "Feature",
"geometry": {
"type": "LineString",
"coordinates": [
[100.0, 0.0], [101.0, 1.0]
]
},
"properties": {
"prop0": "value0",
"prop1": "value1"
}
}
So I think what you would really need is a note on the JDIL site
about conventions for turning GeoJSON into GeoJDIL.
Allan
On Jun 1, 2007, at 11:44, Andrew Turner wrote:
> This seems like a very good proposal, but Sean does have a valid
> point.
>
> What would the thoughts be on not requiring the namespace if the data
> was *just* GeoJSON, but require the namespace when the geo is brought
> into other JSON/JDIL data?
>
> Andrew
>
>
> On 6/1/07, Sean Gillies <sgillies at frii.com> wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>> I like RDF and all, but I think we should stick to plain old JSON. It
>> seems to me that JDIL applications could trivially JDIL-ify dumb
>> GeoJSON
>> data.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Sean
>>
>> chris goad wrote:
>>> I've been working with JSON for geo for a year or so at Platial.
>>> I love the simplicity and conciseness of JSON, but there were
>>> things that I missed from earlier work with RDF - not the whole
>>> stack, but basic capabilities for data integration. JDIL (Jason
>>> Data Integration Layer - http://jdil.org ) , which I formulated
>>> earlier this year, was my stab at retrieving what was missing;
>>> JDIL has nothing specific to do with geo, but implementing geo
>>> inside JDIL makes it play well with other data.
>>>
>>> Briefly stated, JDIL is a thin encoding on top of JSON which
>>> adds namespaces, and labeling of objects for representing object
>>> graphs as well as trees. Labels may be URIs, which supports
>>> merging of property-value assertions from different sources about
>>> the same object. JDIL implements the core of the RDF data
>>> model within JSON, though RDF need not be mentioned in
>>> explanations of JDIL.
>>>
>>> Minor changes in GeoJSON would make it compliant with JDIL's
>>> conventions, and as a consequence would allow GeoJSON to mixed
>>> with other kinds of data in a wider range of applications. This
>>> is an important benefit, since geo applications that involve data
>>> of other varieties are the norm rather than the exception. The
>>> changes : 1) support the namespace construct, and allocate a URI
>>> for the GeoJSON namespace, 2) utilize the generic JDIL "@type"
>>> name for the type-of concept.
>>>
>>> In pure geo applications (eg sending feature geometry off to a
>>> client for rendering), the overhead is miniscule. A pure GeoJSON
>>> file would need only include this property in the root object:
>>>
>>> "@namespaces": {"":"http://whateverthegeojsonuriturnsouttobe"}
>>>
>>> This specifies a blank prefix for the GeoJSON namespace, removing
>>> the need to prefix GeoJSON properties in the body.
>>>
>>> Platial supports JDIL in its feeds and api, with GeoRSS
>>> properties carrying the geo. I'd like to add support for GeoJSON
>>> as well.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Chris
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geojson mailing list
>> geojson at lists.geojson.org
>> http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org
>>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Turner
> ajturner at highearthorbit.com 42.2774N x 83.7611W
> http://highearthorbit.com Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
> _______________________________________________
> geojson mailing list
> geojson at lists.geojson.org
> http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org
--
Allan Doyle
+1.781.433.2695
adoyle at eogeo.org
More information about the GeoJSON
mailing list