Add inverse of `hasGeometry`

[dr-shorthair]

Pointer from a geometry to the feature(s) that it is the geometry for - e.g. from GEOX

• isGeometryOf

Detail from opengeospatial/geosemantics-dwg#73

[akuckartz]

Which usecases exist for inverses ?

[dr-shorthair]

We have a Geometry Data Store which is managed separate from the Feature Store. The inverse property allows the source of the geometry in the store to be explicit.

I know that some people consider inverse-properties to be an anti-pattern, because of synchronisation risks. And it is certainly true that the Geometry Store could just have the direct triples likeFeature99 geo:hasGeometry Geometry88 . stored alongside Geometry88 a geo:Geometry .. But in this case it is the existence of the two stores that creates the risk, not the existence of the inverse predicate.

[akuckartz]

@dr-shorthair

We have a Geometry Data Store which is managed separate from the Feature Store.

That is an interesting and probably not unusual aspect of such architectures.

And it is certainly true that the Geometry Store could just have the direct triples like Feature99 geo:hasGeometry Geometry88 .

So it is as easy to not use the inverse triples? Or do they have any significant advantages?

[mathib]

@akuckartz : you mean not using owl:inverseOf, but a custom property (ex:inverseProperyOf) without reasoning consequences?

[akuckartz]

@mathib No, I do not understand why isGeometryOf is needed when triples like Feature99 geo:hasGeometry Geometry88 can be used (instead of Geometry88 geo:isGeometryOf geo:Feature99).

[HolgerKnublauch]

Please don't add inverse properties. They create unnecessary complexity.

[jabhay]

MoSCoW poll created

[nicholascar]

Closing this issue due to discussions with @dr-shorthair as he and I see this property as superfluous.