Fix GNAF class relations

[dr-shorthair]

1. Since not every individual geo:Geometry is a GnafEntity then the sub-class relationship is incorrect.

[dr-shorthair]

2. GnafEntity is a spatial-object (feature or geometry) which has some lifecycle information (created, retired) and a mandatory identifier. Should be sub-class-of geo:SpatialObject?

[dr-shorthair]

3. Several GNAF classes correspond to ASGS classes, but with the additional requirements of a GnafEntity. These should be sub-classes of GnafEntity also with equivalent-class relationships with the ASGS classes recorded somewhere. (maybe in a separate graph).

• gnaf:State equivalent to asgs:StateOrTerritory
• gnaf:MB_2011 and gnaf:MB_2016 sub-classes of gnaf:MeshBlock equivalent to asgs:MeshBlock

[dr-shorthair]

2. No - some GnafEntity sub-classes are not spatial-objects (AddressSite, MeshblockMatch, Alias).

[dr-shorthair]

3. Separate graph is in gnaf-asgs.ttl

[dr-shorthair]

4. There is not actually a STREET class in the G-NAF product description, only STREET_LOCALITY. I don't understand why there is one in gnaf-ont ...

[dr-shorthair]

4. Propose making gnaf:StreetLocality the principle class in gnaf-ont - sub-class of geo:Feature and gnaf:GnafEntity. Not quite sure what gnaf:Street does

[dr-shorthair]

related to: #8

[nicholascar]

I remember these Street class issues, a couple of years ago now! No answers I’m afraid only I agree with your characterisation of the situation

[dr-shorthair]

My hunch is that you guys wanted a general 'Street' class to aggregate all the sections represented as StreetLocality, but you got a bit tangled up in the sub-classing relationships. Have added some comments for now, so we can come back to it.

Definition: a complete Street that crosses multiple localities.

NOTE: In principle, a Street is composed of several StreetLocality members, however this relationship is not present in the GNAF Ontology. Furthermore, the GNAF product definition does not contain a class for Street, only for StreetLocality. The GNAF Ontology does not therefore correspond to the GNAF product in this area, and should be reviewed and potentially revised to capture the correct alignment. In particular, in the GNAF Ontology geometry is associated with gnaf:StreetLocality, but not with gnaf:Street which means that gnaf:Street as a sub-class of geo:Feature is not Loc-I conformant.