Why observedProperty vs observes ? why actedOnProperty vs actsOn ?

[maximelefrancois86]

It is common in SSN to have multiple classes included in the domain/range of properties.

With this mechanism available, why wouldn't we want to make our lives easier, and:

• keep only one of observedProperty vs observes (observes is better IMHO)
• keep only one of actedOnProperty vs actsOn (actsOn is better IMHO)

That way, users won't need to remember which one appy in which situation

[maximelefrancois86]

also:

• keep only one of wasObservedBy vs isObservedBy (isObservedBy is better IMHO)
• keep only one of wasActedOnBy vs isActedOnBy (isActedOnBy is better IMHO)

That way, users won't need to remember that the 'was' version applies to Observation/Actuation, and the 'is' version applies to Sensor/Actuator (which you'll admit is far from obvious from the name of these properties)

[dr-shorthair]

I believe these differences are a result of not wanting to break backward compatibility with legacy implementations.
We have tidied up a few in the less-used parts of the ontology by deprecating in the RDF and omitting mention in the spec.
Not sure how far we should go in the more central parts of the ontology without risking alienating significant parts of the user base.

@kjano may have an opinion here.

[maximelefrancois86]

(I just give the occasional nudge on this topic to sense either reluctance or acceptance.)