The concept of the “world of observation” refers to the realm populated by phenomena—the objects and events that we perceive through our senses, such as sights, sounds, and physical experiences. In contrast to abstract ideas or intellectual concepts, phenomena are the raw data of our sensory experience, forming the basis of how we understand and interact with reality.
However, when representing this world of observation in geospatial data, it’s essential to recognise that the same phenomena can be interpreted and represented differently depending on the Ontology applied. An ontology is a structured framework that defines the categories and relationships within a particular domain. For instance, a tree might be perceived as a biological entity in one ontology, while another might categorise it as a part of urban infrastructure.
Different organisations or purposes can lead to the same phenomenon being represented by different entities. For example, a river might be seen as a natural watercourse by an environmental agency, while a city planner might focus on it as a potential flood risk zone. Each perspective uses a different ontology to make sense of the same phenomenon.
By applying a specific Ontology to the world of observation, we transform it into a “world of discourse”, where the phenomena are organised and understood according to the chosen framework. This process highlights the importance of clarity when representing reality with geospatial data, as different ontologies can lead to different interpretations and representations of the same underlying phenomena.
The concept of the world of observation and phenomena is rooted in the philosophy of observation, emphasising the subjective nature of how we perceive and categorise the world around us. Understanding this is crucial for effective and meaningful geospatial representation, as it reminds us that our representations are not just about capturing reality but also about how we choose to interpret and structure it.