Capitalisation of abbreviations in ontology terms

[FransKnibbe]

There are inconsistencies in capitalisation of abbreviations, in both GeoSPARQL 1.0 and 1.1. Examples:
1.0: asWKT, asGML vs. rcc8dc, sfEquals
1.1: asGeoJSON vs. asDggsWkt

Do we want to establish a guideline? If so, what should it be?

Considerations:

1. IRIs are case sensitive (see IRI equality in https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-IRIs), so changing the case of letters in 1.0 IRIs could break things.
2. I could not find a general guideline on capitalisation of abbreviations in RDF IRIs.

[nicholascar]

I don't think we can change any of the 1.0 IRIs - we've promised not to break anything - so they stay.

For 1.1: I've changed my addition of asDggsWkt to asDGGSWKT and dggsWktLiteral to dggsWKTLiteral (in PR #106) as these seems to better align with the capitalised acronyms.

I think our guidance should now be something like:

use CamelCase for concatenated words, except for acronyms which should be capitalized. Upper CamelCase (starting capital) for class names, and lower camelCase (starting lowercase) for properties & functions. Properties & functions starting with an acronym should have the starting acronym in lower case

So, asGeoJSON fits that, as does the changed asDGGSWKT. dggsWKTLiteral is ok IFF we buy the final sentence...

Clearly I've made up that guidance to retrofit the spec as it is now (after my changes mentioned above).

Are there any alternate suggestions to the guidance?

[nicholascar]

Several of the DGGS properties have been removed, so now we only have asDGGS and dggsLiteral.

We still have inconsistencies from 1.0 but we still can't change those. I think this issue is solved, as best it can be, for 1.1 so I'm bumping it over to 1.2.

[jabhay]

Closing this as either consistent or a breaking change given the comments above.