-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
23-019 document update #183
Conversation
sections/clause_06_overview.adoc
Outdated
|
||
An SensorThings API Server implementation can implement the full OData specification. | ||
An OData client can access a SensorThings API service. | ||
The OGC SensorThings API v2 interface is not an OData interface and does not claim to be an OData service. It specifies a subset of the OData interface, and extends it at the same time. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Git works on a per-line-basis, so avoid long lines. Once sentence per line gives the cleanest history and makes diffs easier to read.
@@ -37,10 +34,11 @@ image::images/GRP0001.png[Sensing Core, align="center"] | |||
In this section, we define each entity depicted in <<img-sta-core>> and its relationships with other entities. | |||
Additionally, we also provide examples to model the entities in different contexts. | |||
|
|||
[[thing]] | |||
==== Thing | |||
==== Requirement Class: Thing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The [[thing]] anchor allows referencing this section. Not sure if we ever need to though, can always re-add the anchors.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
merge issue, will fix. Thanks for pointing!
@@ -893,7 +889,7 @@ Each Feature entity SHALL have the mandatory properties and MAY have the optiona | |||
[%metadata] | |||
identifier:: {identifier}/req/datamodel/sensing/feature/relations | |||
|
|||
Each Feature entity SHALL have the direct relation between a Feature entity and other entity types listed in Table {counter:table-num}. | |||
Each Thing entity SHALL have the direct relation between a Thing entity and other entity types listed in Table XX. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm pretty sure this section is about Feature, not Thing?
Why change the {counter:table-num}
to XX?
{counter:table-num}
should give the number of the previous table.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks like a merge issue
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ | |||
:sectnums: |,all| |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Don't change template things unless absolutely sure about it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
got it
images/GRP0001.png
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you delete images, make sure they are not used any more!
Currently the document can not be built.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
merge issues again :(
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Best not combine renaming with editing. It's not impossible to see what (if anything) was changed in this file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The file did not have any content though, will try to be careful about it next time
sections/clause_06_overview.adoc
Outdated
Samplings may be generated by a sequence of SamplingProcedures (and vice-versa), however a Sampler must employ a unique SamplingProcedure to maintain unique Sampling-Sampler-SamplingProcedure relationships. | ||
In scenarios where a Feature is not directly available for Sampling, a PreparationProcedure composed of multiple PreparationSteps may optionally be used to generate a PreparedFeature. | ||
In order to generate Samplings, a Sampler, that may be any physical device (or even a human being part of a survey campaign), must carefully select a SamplingProcedure. | ||
A Sampling may be generated by a SamplingProcedure. This SamplingProcedure can be used by multiple Samplers, however a Sampler can not use multiple SamplingProcedures. Hence, any Sampling that is generated by a Sampler is always associated with a unique SamplingProcedure. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One sentence per line please, hard to comment otherwise.
however a Sampler can not use multiple SamplingProcedures
Hmm, that may need fixing. I think some Samplers can implement many SamplingProcedures... However, a Sampling can only be created by a single one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I agree with the Sampler->SamplingProcedure relationship. I was planning to discuss it in the telco today, good that you pointed this one out
In scenarios where a Feature is not directly available for Sampling, a PreparationProcedure composed of multiple PreparationSteps may optionally be used to generate a PreparedFeature. | ||
In order to generate Samplings, a Sampler, that may be any physical device (or even a human being part of a survey campaign), must carefully select a SamplingProcedure. | ||
A Sampling may be generated by a SamplingProcedure. This SamplingProcedure can be used by multiple Samplers, however a Sampler can not use multiple SamplingProcedures. Hence, any Sampling that is generated by a Sampler is always associated with a unique SamplingProcedure. | ||
In scenarios where a Feature is not directly available for Sampling, a PreparationProcedure composed of multiple PreparationSteps may optionally be used to generate a PreparedSample (Feature entity). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In scenarios where a Feature is not directly available for Sampling
What does that mean?
From OMS: In addition, various preparation steps may be performed on samples both before and after observations are performed on the sample.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It means when a Feature is basically a prepared Feature (or Sample). For example, in case of water quality monitoring, it is not feasible to have the entire River Feature available to observe, a PreparationProcedure is applied to get a sample of water
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, preparation procedures are not used to create a sample. Sampling procedures create samples. Preparation procedures are applied to samples to prepare them for measuring, or to conserve them like with specimens.
4a0f11c
to
9911352
Compare
I don't understand why are commits from March 20 included in this PR |
Probably because you based this PR on the commits from back then. You need to reset your working copy to the right branch/commit before making a new branch. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is still this "sync local branch" commit (and 4 others) that should not be there.
|
||
[[who-should-use]] | ||
=== Who should use the OGC SensorThings API |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That heading should not have been removed.
I've cherry-picked just the last commit onto the 23-019 branch, into a |
I've merged the fixed branch, so this PR can be closed. |
No description provided.