ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)

Context Information Management (CIM); Information Model (MOD0)

DGS/CIM-006-MOD0

General Information

• Status: Published
• Publication Date: 24-Jul-2019
• Technical Committee: CIM - cross-cutting Context Information Management
• Current Stage: 12 - Completion
• Due Date: 26-Jul-2019
• Completion Date: 25-Jul-2019

Standards Content (Sample)

ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)






GROUP SPECIFICATION
Context Information Management (CIM);
Information Model (MOD0)
Disclaimer
The present document has been produced and approved by the cross-cutting Context Information Management (CIM) ETSI
Industry Specification Group (ISG) and represents the views of those members who participated in this ISG.
It does not necessarily represent the views of the entire ETSI membership.

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
2 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)



Reference
DGS/CIM-006-MOD0
Keywords
information model; interoperability; smart city

ETSI
650 Route des Lucioles
F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE

Tel.: [phone]  Fax: [phone]

Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C
Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la
Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88

Important notice
The present document can be downloaded from:
http://www.etsi.org/standards-search
The present document may be made available in electronic versions and/or in print. The content of any electronic and/or
print versions of the present document shall not be modified without the prior written authorization of ETSI. In case of any
existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions and/or in print, the prevailing version of an ETSI
deliverable is the one made publicly available in PDF format at www.etsi.org/deliver.
Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status.
Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at
https://portal.etsi.org/TB/ETSIDeliverableStatus.aspx
If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services:
https://portal.etsi.org/People/CommiteeSupportStaff.aspx
Copyright Notification
No part may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying
and microfilm except as authorized by written permission of ETSI.
The content of the PDF version shall not be modified without the written authorization of ETSI.
The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.

© ETSI 2019.
All rights reserved.

DECT™, PLUGTESTS™, UMTS™ and the ETSI logo are trademarks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members.

3GPP™ and LTE™ are trademarks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and
of the 3GPP Organizational Partners.
oneM2M™ logo is a trademark of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and
of the oneM2M Partners.
®
GSM and the GSM logo are trademarks registered and owned by the GSM Association.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
3 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
Contents
Intellectual Property Rights . 5
Foreword . 5
Modal verbs terminology . 5
1 Scope . 6
2 References . 6
2.1 Normative references . 6
2.2 Informative references . 6
3 Definition of terms, symbols and abbreviations . 7
3.1 Terms . 7
3.2 Symbols . 7
3.3 Abbreviations . 8
4 Rationale for a multi-layered and multi-scale graph-based context information model . 8
4.1 Why use a graph-based model? . 8
4.2 Separating semantic referencing from structural descriptions . 9
4.3 Graph Examples used in the current document . 9
5 NGSI-LD meta-model . 10
5.0 Introduction . 10
5.1 Fundamentals of property graphs and graph databases . 11
5.2 Reification with blank nodes . 11
5.3 Formal definition . 14
5.3.0 Introduction. 14
5.3.1 Entity Types . 14
5.3.2 Properties and Relationships Types . 15
5.4 Serialization with JSON-LD. 15
6 ETSI ISG CIM cross-domain ontology . 17
6.1 Rationale. 17
6.2 NGSI-LD API compatibility . 17
6.3 Formal specification . 18
6.3.0 Comparison with other approaches . 18
6.3.1 Mobility (of Entities) . 21
6.3.2 Properties . 22
6.3.3 Location (Property or Relationship) . 23
6.3.4 Values . 24
6.3.5 Temporal Properties and Values . 24
6.3.6 Systems Composition . 25
6.3.6.0 Introduction . 25
6.3.6.1 Top-down system composition . 25
6.3.6.2 Bottom-up system composition and clustering . 26
Annex A (informative): Guidelines for Entity Typing . 28
A.0 Introduction . 28
A.1 Additional implementation requirements . 28
A.2 Modelling recommendations . 29
A.3 Using OWL/RDFS/RDF modelling . 29
A.3.0 Introduction . 29
A.3.1 OWL/RDFS/RDF modelling . 29
A.3.2 Object-Oriented modelling . 30
Annex B (informative): Relationship to other cross-domain ontologies and upper ontologies . 31
B.0 Introduction . 31
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
4 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
B.1 Mapping to oneM2M. 31
B.2 Mapping to W3C WoT Thing Description . 32
B.3 Mapping to W3C Time Ontology . 32
B.4 GSMA NGSI-LD-Entities . 33
B.5 Mapping to SAREF . 33
Annex C (informative): Distinguishing real-word entities from NGSI-LD entities . 35
C.0 Introduction . 35
C.1 W3C View . 35
C.2 NGSI-LD View . 35
Annex D (informative): OWL-DL representation of the Information Model . 37
Annex E (informative): Authors & contributors . 43
Annex F (informative): Change History . 44
History . 45


ETSI

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
5 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
Intellectual Property Rights
Essential patents
IPRs essential or potentially essential to normative deliverables may have been declared to ETSI. The information
pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found
in ETSI SR 000 314: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in
respect of ETSI standards", which is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web
server (https://ipr.etsi.org/).
Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Policy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee
can be given as to the existence of other IPRs not referenced in ETSI SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web
server) which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document.
Trademarks
The present document may include trademarks and/or tradenames which are asserted and/or registered by their owners.
ETSI claims no ownership of these except for any which are indicated as being the property of ETSI, and conveys no
right to use or reproduce any trademark and/or tradename. Mention of those trademarks in the present document does
not constitute an endorsement by ETSI of products, services or organizations associated with those trademarks.
Foreword
This Group Specification (GS) has been produced by ETSI Industry Specification Group (ISG) cross-cutting Context
Information Management (CIM).
Modal verbs terminology
In the present document "shall", "shall not", "should", "should not", "may", "need not", "will", "will not", "can" and
"cannot" are to be interpreted as described in clause 3.2 of the ETSI Drafting Rules (Verbal forms for the expression of
provisions).
"must" and "must not" are NOT allowed in ETSI deliverables except when used in direct citation.

ETSI

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
6 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
1 Scope
The purpose of the present document is to give property graphs a formal semantic grounding based on
RDF/RDFS/OWL, with blank nodes reification, geared to JSON-LD serialization. On top of it, a set of core cross-
domain ontology classes have been defined, based on this meta-model. This whole information model is meant to be
used by many applications as a basis for data representations. It is compatible with the NGSI-LD API defined in [2].
2 References
2.1 Normative references
References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or
non-specific. For specific references, only the cited version applies. For non-specific references, the latest version of the
referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
Referenced documents which are not found to be publicly available in the expected location might be found at
https://docbox.etsi.org/Reference.
NOTE: While any hyperlinks included in this clause were valid at the time of publication, ETSI cannot guarantee
their long term validity.
The following referenced documents are necessary for the application of the present document.
[1] W3C Recommendation: "JSON-LD 1.0: A JSON-based Serialization for Linked Data".
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/.
[2] ETSI GS CIM 009 (V1.1.1) (2019-01): "Context Information Management (CIM); NGSI-LD
API".
NOTE: Available at
https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/CIM/001_099/009/01.01.01_60/gs_CIM009v010101p.pdf.
[3] W3C Recommendation 19 October 2017: "Time Ontology in OWL".
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/.
2.2 Informative references
References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or
non-specific. For specific references, only the cited version applies. For non-specific references, the latest version of the
referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
NOTE: While any hyperlinks included in this clause were valid at the time of publication, ETSI cannot guarantee
their long term validity.
The following referenced documents are not necessary for the application of the present document but they assist the
user with regard to a particular subject area.
[i.1] Guinard, D., & Trifa, V. (2016): "Building the web of things", Shelter Island: Manning.
[i.2] Tim Berners-Lee (2006-07-27): "Linked Data", Design Issues W3C.
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html.
[i.3] J. Frey, K. Müller, S. Hellmann, E. Rahm and M.-E. Vidal: Semantic Web - Interoperability,
Usability, Applicability an IOS Press Journal: "Evaluation of Metadata Representations in RDF
stores", 2017.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
7 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
[i.4] Cassandras, C. G., & Lafortune, S. (2009) Springer Science & Business Media: "Introduction to
discrete event systems".
[i.5] W3C: "Simple part-whole relations in OWL Ontologies".
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/SimplePartWhole.
[i.6] W3C: "A Semantic Web Primer for Object-Oriented Software Developers".
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/TR/sw-oosd-primer/.
[i.7] W3C: "HttpRange14Webography".
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/wiki/HttpRange14Webography.
[i.8] Leo Sauermann and Richard Cyganiak (2008-12-03). W3C Interest Group Note: "Cool URIs for
the Semantic Web".
NOTE: Available at https://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/.
3 Definition of terms, symbols and abbreviations
3.1 Terms
For the purposes of the present document, the following terms apply:
cross-domain ontology: part of the information model that defines generic classes (formal concepts and constructs,
with associated constraints) that serve as common denominators between domain specific models, addressing the
temporal and structural description of physical systems
domain-specific ontologies: information models that define base classes and their constraints, within specific technical
domains (e.g. buildings, transportation, agriculture) and define their structure and vocabulary
meta-model: part of the information model that formally defines the NGSI-LD foundational classes (Entities,
Relationships, Properties and reification constructs) on the basis of RDF/RDFS/OWL
NGSI-LD entity: informational representative of something that is supposed to exist in the real world, physically or
conceptually. Any instance of such an entity shall be uniquely identified by a URI, and characterized by reference to
one or more NGSI-LD Entity Type(s)
NGSI-LD property: description instance which associates a main characteristic, which is an NGSI-LD Value, to either
an NGSI-LD Entity, an NGSI-LD Relationship or another NGSI-LD Property
NOTE: It includes the special "hasValue" property to define its target value.
NGSI-LD relationship: description of a directed link between a subject which is either an NGSI-LD Entity, an NGSI-
LD Property, or another NGSI-LD Relationship on one hand, and an object, which is an NGSI-LD Entity, on the other
hand
NOTE: It includes the special "hasObject" property to define its target object.
NGSI-LD value: JSON value (i.e. a string, a number, true or false, an object, an array), or a JSON-LD typed value
(i.e. a string as the lexical form of the value together with a type, defined by an XSD base type or more generally an
IRI), or a JSON-LD structured value (i.e. a set, a list, a language-tagged string)
EXAMPLE: An NGSI-LD Entity of type (Type Name) "Vehicle" (when parked) can be the subject of an NGSI-
LD Relationship which has as its object a NGSI-LD Entity of type "Parking".
3.2 Symbols
Void.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
8 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
3.3 Abbreviations
For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply:
API Application Programming Interface
CIM Context Information Management
CNIT Consorzio Nazionale Interuniversitario per le Telecomunicazioni
DBMS Database Management System
GSMA GSM Association
HTTP Hypertext Transfer Protocol
IRI Internationalized Resource Identifier
ISG Industry Study Group
JSON Javascript Object Notation
JSON-LD Javascript Object Notation for Linked Data
LOD Linked Open Data
NIR Non-Informational Resource
OGC Open Geospatial Consortium
OWL Web Ontology Language
OWL-DL Web Ontology Language Description Logic
RDF Resource Description Framework
RDFS Resource Description Framework Schema
SAREF Smart Applications REFerence ontology
SAS Société par Actions Simplifiée
URI Uniform Resource Identifier
XML eXtended Markup language
XSD XML Schema Definition
4 Rationale for a multi-layered and multi-scale
graph-based context information model
4.1 Why use a graph-based model?
Systems and environments about which context information is stored and managed encompass many physical and non-
physical entities. Context comprises all characteristics of these entities, as well as their states and other dynamic
properties, together with relationships that stand for actual and virtual connections between them. This context
information may be consolidated on the basis of data obtained from many different primary sources and infrastructures.
Typical examples of such systems would be smart homes, buildings, or cities. Such systems, due to the wide range of
requirements and granularities, are complex from the semantic, structural and behavioural viewpoints.
The expressivity and versatility of graph-based models allows to bring the whole corpus of graph theory to bear and to
capture key information about such complex environments, in a directly usable way, as the graph matches all kinds of
real-world connections between different physical entities.
Graph models bring a fresh view on the definition of context information. In the first wave of context-awareness
research dating back to the early 2000s, context used to be mostly, and implicitly, user-centric, typically capturing
e.g. the activity or location of mobile users to adapt services offered to them. A widely publicized definition of context,
dating from this stage of research, was "any information that can be used to characterize the situation of an entity". In a
broader view of context where the very notion of context is de-centred and relative, this definition may in fact remain
valid if entities are represented as the nodes of a graph. Rather than through a vague notion of situation, context is
defined in the present document as the set of properties characterizing these nodes, together with the set of relationships
that enmesh them together, and the properties of these relationships. In this perspective, the primary data of one
application may be the context of another, and vice versa. Context is, thus decentered and broadly defined, the graph
itself. NGSI-LD thus maintains and exposes context information as a graph of matching links between the informational
units corresponding to real-world entities of these environments.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
9 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
Traditional (mono-centred) context fitted rather well a classical object-oriented or key-value description, with a set of
more or less detailed context features attached to a single entity. The multi-cantered notion of context address in the
present document requires breaking this rigid hierarchical model by using a more expressive, flexible and adaptable
information model. Graphs are the only model adapted to capture the complex structure of and inter-entity relationships
that make up context information in the sense in which it is defined it here. This information need not be semantically
defined from the outset: it may be natively structural information, capturing e.g. containment or adjacency relationships.
The semantics of this context may be added in a later stage of graph enrichment. This model fits the natively distributed
nature of context data sources.
The Web of Things (WoT) [i.1] does also involve a graph of sorts, but it dispenses with maintaining it explicitly inside
a database. The WoT graph is, like the graph of the original web, an implicit 100 % distributed graph of hyperlinks, not
between web pages but between resources corresponding to connected devices that expose an HTTP interface.
This view also aligns well with the grand evolution of the Web towards Linked Data, an evolution proposed by W3C
from the Semantic Web project [i.2] that is currently supported by RDF-derived graph models. Linked Data provides a
method of publishing structured data so that it can be interlinked and support semantic queries.
4.2 Separating semantic referencing from structural
descriptions
The NGSI-LD information model separates semantic referencing, used in the classical sense of the Semantic Web, from
the structural description proper. The structural description may itself be decomposed into a basis structural graph
whose nodes are physically-matched entities, and an overlay layer used to capture the way in which these entities are
clustered into subgraphs.
Semantic referencing used by NGSI-LD is based on standard RDF/RDS/OWL typing and public ontologies, as shared
by all other semantic information models. All nodes and edges of the structural graph are thus matched to several
relevant classes/categories of these ontologies that jointly characterize the features shared by all instances of these
classes.
A structural graph is a model of the structural description of an environment, capturing the relationships between the
different subsystems that make up this environment. This description is, to some extent, independent of the overlaying
semantic referencing, and it could be considered to "stand on its own", even without this referencing. A structural graph
does in fact have a different kind of semantics of its own, such as e.g. when a graph captures and matches the structure
of a physical network like a power grid or a water distribution network. These semantics apply to the graphs as a whole
and are not reducible to the kind of "per-resource" semantics, which RDF is meant to describe.
4.3 Graph Examples used in the current document
Two examples of structural representations of city environments will be used as lead examples throughout the present
document and are presented in Figure 1. Property graph example (1) and Figure 1. Property graph example (2).
The following graphical conventions are used throughout the present document:
• Regular (physically-matched) entities are represented as black rectangles.
• Relationships between these entities are represented as diamonds (rhombuses) overlaid on the corresponding
arc of the graph, a convention borrowed from "entity-relationship" diagrams.
• Properties are represented by ovals that are on an arc between their entity or relationship and the property
value, but often the arc is shortened to zero length for compactness.
• Values are represented as hexagons that may about the oval of the property of which they are the target,
omitting an arc between the two.
Figure 1 describes a parking scenario, adjacent to two different streets. Information about the streets, parking places,
and the sensors that monitor are attached to entities as shown in the figure. This example is intended to illustrate the full
expressivity of a property graph as used to capture not only pure semantics, as an RDF graph would, but also structural
and behavioural (in this case, the real-time state) information.
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
10 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)

Figure 1: Property graph example (1)
Figure 2 example (2) is a more complex example used to illustrate intersecting domains and intertwined technical
systems. The example consists of a building and its parts (using "hasPart" relationships) forming the structure of the
building, in addition to other technical systems that are included in the building. The building is comprised of a garage
and apartments (only one instance is represented below). A parking place within the garage belongs to the apartment,
thus forming one system together. The building is equipped with a security system containing security devices.
Additionally, there is a separate public parking that also appears in the example.

Figure 2: Property graph example (2)
5 NGSI-LD meta-model
5.0 Introduction
The NGSI-LD meta-model provides a formal basis for representing "property graphs" using RDF/RDFS/OWL. It
makes it possible to perform back and forth conversion between datasets based on the property graph model on the one
hand and linked data datasets which rely on the RDF framework, on the other hand. This may be seen as raising the
semantic expressivity of RDF triples to the level of property graphs. Property graphs may, contrary to RDF, use
predicates as subjects of other predicates (properties of properties and properties of relationships).
ETSI

---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
11 ETSI GS CIM 006 V1.1.1 (2019-07)
5.1 Fundamentals of property graphs and graph databases
Property graphs are the implicit semi-formal data models underlying most present-day graph databases. They have
gained widespread following, more in industry than in academia. They make it possible to attach properties (defined as
key-value pairs) to relationships, a feature which RDF does not directly support, but they lack the standardization and
formal underpinn
...