'Mountain' definition is old #617
Assignees
Comments
|
Good catch! I've moved the expansion of the definition to a comment and noted the USGS's new stance on the matter, adding the link you provided above. I've also added some axioms linking mountains to volcanic activity or tectonic movement. I'll add the UN Environment classes next. Would you like your ORCID included on the classes for nanocrediting? |
|
Hello,
Would you like your ORCID included on the classes for nanocrediting?
Wow, I didn't know ORCID can be linked ... (sorry, I'm a newbie.) Here is
my ORCID:
0000-0002-7556-2097
As for my radiation/nuclear contamination ontology, it still has a long way
to go ... When it becomes something decent, I'll contact you.
Thank you! Misa
…On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 5:50 PM, Pier Luigi Buttigieg < ***@***.***> wrote:
Good catch!
I've moved the expansion of the definition to a comment and noted the
USGS's new stance on the matter, adding the link you provided above. I've
also added some axioms linking mountains to volcanic activity or tectonic
movement.
I'll add the UN Environment classes next.
Would you like your ORCID included on the classes for nanocrediting?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#617 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXGy0KkdSikp8pSCXdF3BNFTQ0I2Oki_ks5t5FoigaJpZM4UXgyA>
.
--
Regards,
Misa Yasumiishi
PhD Candidate
Department of Geography
University at Buffalo, NY
|
|
The Annex you linked to from UN Environment is useful, but would you have the full reference of its source? Or a comparable document that's citable? I see the Kapos 2000 reference, but I can't find the actual classification document, just documents pointing to several websites that don't resolve anymore, such as this document. |
|
Hello Pier,
The first PDF listed on this page contains the same information in page 74.
Is this satisfactory as reference?
https://www.ourplanet.com/wcmc/
Best, Misa
…On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Pier Luigi Buttigieg < ***@***.***> wrote:
The Annex you linked to from UN Environment is useful, but would you have
the full reference of its source? Or a comparable document that's citable?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#617 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXGy0IEsGf9KxLKAonYiLfEudzHjWJWwks5t5OyZgaJpZM4UXgyA>
.
--
Regards,
Misa Yasumiishi
PhD Candidate
Department of Geography
University at Buffalo, NY
|
Yes, the PDF will work! Many thanks. |
|
I reached out to UNEP-WCMC and they very promptly came back with this:
|
|
This is amazing. Thank you for sharing the information!
Best, Misa
…On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 11:45 AM, Pier Luigi Buttigieg < ***@***.***> wrote:
I reached out to UNEP-WCMC and they very promptly came back with this:
Metadata on the mountain region maps
https://www.unep-wcmc.org/system/dataset_file_fields/
files/000/000/010/original/mountains_and_treecover_in_
mountains_2002_sum_metadata.pdf?1395068902
The Mountain watch publication for which the classification was devised
https://www.unep-wcmc.org/resources-and-data/mountain-
watch--environmental-change-sustainable-development-in-mountains
The original 2000 mountain of the world map methodology: -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306151877_
Developing_a_map_of_the_world's_mountain_forests_Forests_in_
sustainable_mountain_development_a_state_of_knowledge_report_for_2000
Kapos, Valerie & Rhind, J & Edwards, M & Price, Martin & Ravilious,
Corinna & Butt, Nathalie. (2000). Developing a map of the world's mountain
forests., Forests in sustainable mountain development: a state of knowledge
report for 2000. Task Force For. Sustain. Mt. Dev.. 4-19.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#617 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXGy0IEbq_aQljRLqDicDhBg3z3bspF8ks5t5VYygaJpZM4UXgyA>
.
--
Regards,
Misa Yasumiishi
PhD Candidate
Department of Geography
University at Buffalo, NY
|
pbuttigieg
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 17, 2018
|
Hi @misayasu The semantics of these classes were a little strange, but I think we have them. Sorry for the delay. Here are the classes and their PURLs. The PURLs will go live on our next release, but you can start using them for annotation right away. One thing that's bothering me is the "local elevation range" criterion of classes 4-6. I'd like some more detail on what that is.
|
pbuttigieg
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 23, 2018
|
Dear Pier,
Thank you for working on this. This is a very interesting process .. Right
now I'm not able to see those PURL URLs but I'm looking forward to seeing
the definitions live.
Regards, Misa
…On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 4:19 PM Pier Luigi Buttigieg < ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi @misayasu <https://github.com/misayasu>
The semantics of these classes were a little strange, but I think we have
them. Sorry for the delay. Here are the classes and their PURLs. The PURLs
will go live on our next release, but you can start using them for
annotation right away.
One thing that's bothering me is the "local elevation range" criterion of
classes 4-6. I'd like some more detail on what that is.
Term PURL Notes
'high-elevation mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001459 This
is the superclass for classes 1-3
'UNEP-WCMC class 1 mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001461
'UNEP-WCMC class 2 mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001462
'UNEP-WCMC class 3 mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001463
'mid-elevation mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001460 This
is the superclass for classes 4-6
'UNEP-WCMC class 4 mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001464
'UNEP-WCMC class 5 mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001465
'UNEP-WCMC class 6 mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001466
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001467 This is out of the mountain
hierarchy and in the broader elevation hierarchy as this class does not
seem to actually refer to mountains at all.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#617 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXGy0AWFZmYGyZFpNdYhiVOWFk81fR1Lks5ud-zZgaJpZM4UXgyA>
.
--
Misa Yasumiishi
PhD Candidate
Department of Geography
University at Buffalo, NY
|
|
Hi Misa, as noted they will only be live once our next release is made. In
the meantime, you can load envo-edit.owl (in the src/envo directory) in
your ontology viewer to preview the classes.
…On Mon, 24 Sep 2018, 02:47 misayasu, ***@***.***> wrote:
Dear Pier,
Thank you for working on this. This is a very interesting process .. Right
now I'm not able to see those PURL URLs but I'm looking forward to seeing
the definitions live.
Regards, Misa
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 4:19 PM Pier Luigi Buttigieg <
***@***.***> wrote:
> Hi @misayasu <https://github.com/misayasu>
>
> The semantics of these classes were a little strange, but I think we have
> them. Sorry for the delay. Here are the classes and their PURLs. The
PURLs
> will go live on our next release, but you can start using them for
> annotation right away.
>
> One thing that's bothering me is the "local elevation range" criterion of
> classes 4-6. I'd like some more detail on what that is.
> Term PURL Notes
> 'high-elevation mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001459
This
> is the superclass for classes 1-3
> 'UNEP-WCMC class 1 mountain'
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001461
> 'UNEP-WCMC class 2 mountain'
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001462
> 'UNEP-WCMC class 3 mountain'
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001463
> 'mid-elevation mountain' http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001460
This
> is the superclass for classes 4-6
> 'UNEP-WCMC class 4 mountain'
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001464
> 'UNEP-WCMC class 5 mountain'
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001465
> 'UNEP-WCMC class 6 mountain'
http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001466
> http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01001467 This is out of the mountain
> hierarchy and in the broader elevation hierarchy as this class does not
> seem to actually refer to mountains at all.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#617 (comment)
>,
> or mute the thread
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXGy0AWFZmYGyZFpNdYhiVOWFk81fR1Lks5ud-zZgaJpZM4UXgyA
>
> .
>
--
Misa Yasumiishi
PhD Candidate
Department of Geography
University at Buffalo, NY
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#617 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACK7MpdZwc3_5jxib7JjgJkUp5kwDyFZks5ueCu8gaJpZM4UXgyA>
.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I looked up the definition of 'mountain' today and I think the definition in the lookup service is old. USGS doesn't use 'higher than 300 m' definition any longer (https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-difference-between-mountain-hill-and-peak-lake-and-pond-or-river-and-creek). The definitions by UN Environmental Programme might be the latest and most accurate one (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjhjOiS-bLbAhXBk1kKHYnOC90QFggnMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bvsde.paho.org%2Fbvsacd%2Fcd67%2FhealthImapcts%2Fannex.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1pF45tSz2Igjbdb6o1AIzP).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: