From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Nov 8 23:10:38 2012 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 23:10:38 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Breaking news: GoodRelations now fully integrated with schema.org! Message-ID: <3052C8D9-CD9C-476C-8EAB-050E926B8117@ebusiness-unibw.org> Dear all: Effective immediately, the full GoodRelations vocabulary for e-commerce (http://purl.org/goodrelations/) is now directly available from schema.org, the official library of data schemas maintained and promoted by the four biggest Web search engines, i.e. Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Yandex. Official schema.org blogpost: http://blog.schema.org/2012/11/good-relations-and-schemaorg.html Example type: http://schema.org/ProductModel Technical background information: http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Cookbook/Schema.org In the next days, we will complete the integration on the GoodRelations side, including full mapping axioms so that consumers of crawled data will be able to use the official identifiers of GoodRelations elements in SPARQL queries. I am happy to share with you these great news. It was a a lot of hard work - a great thanks goes to everybody involved, namely Dan Brickley and Ramanathan V. Guha from Google, and all the other supporters of GoodRelations, listed at http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Acknowledgments. Best wishes Martin Hepp -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Fri Nov 9 07:57:10 2012 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 07:57:10 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Nice blogpost summarizing the integration of GoodRelations into schema.org Message-ID: <80274B47-9855-4956-AF51-BD8BB1192282@ebusiness-unibw.org> http://semanticweb.com/goodrelations-fully-integrated-with-schema-org_b33306 Best wishes Martin Hepp -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 00:32:41 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:32:41 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty / gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty. Message-ID: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> Hi, is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? (I hope it is) Best, fps From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 08:32:53 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:32:53 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> Message-ID: Oops, I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? (I hope it is) fps Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : > Hi, > is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? > (I hope it is) > Best, > fps From beroca at gmail.com Tue Nov 13 10:40:12 2012 From: beroca at gmail.com (Bene Rodriguez) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:40:12 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServicePrope?= =?windows-1252?q?rty_=28was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServ?= =?windows-1252?q?iceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> Message-ID: Hi Fran?ois-Paul, In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. Best, Bene Rodriguez -- Research Associate E-Business and Web Science Research Group Department of General Management and E-Business Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) phone: +49 89 6004-2849 email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org web: http://purl.org/beroca On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant wrote: > Oops, > > I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: > > is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? > (I hope it is) > > fps > > Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : > >> Hi, >> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >> (I hope it is) >> Best, >> fps > > > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Tue Nov 13 11:22:19 2012 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 05:22:19 -0500 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> Message-ID: <78C7D877-0ADC-487C-9F1B-B577AB877508@ebusiness-unibw.org> Dear Fran?ois-Paul: The modeling proposed turns your ontology into OWL Full, since gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty is a subproperty of owl:ObjectProperty while gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty is a subproperty of owl:DatatypeProperty, and in OWL DL, no property can be both. If you need to model the case that people should use RDF literals (text, number, whatsoever) and URIs of enumerated values, you could define a subproperty of gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty and set the range to rdfs:Literal. This would allow all typed and untyped RDF Literals, which includes xsd:anyURI for URIs. A similar pattern can also be used when the values of URIs include classes and individuals and you don't want to break OWL DL. Best Martin Hepp On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:40 AM, Bene Rodriguez wrote: > Hi Fran?ois-Paul, > > In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both > gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. > > These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of > the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are > intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. > > In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these > properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue > > I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. > > Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the > modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this > hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and > gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. > > Best, > Bene Rodriguez > -- > Research Associate > E-Business and Web Science Research Group > Department of General Management and E-Business > Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) > phone: +49 89 6004-2849 > email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org > web: http://purl.org/beroca > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant > wrote: >> Oops, >> >> I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: >> >> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? >> (I hope it is) >> >> fps >> >> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : >> >>> Hi, >>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >>> (I hope it is) >>> Best, >>> fps >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> goodrelations mailing list >> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations > > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 12:03:39 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:03:39 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: <78C7D877-0ADC-487C-9F1B-B577AB877508@ebusiness-unibw.org> References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> <78C7D877-0ADC-487C-9F1B-B577AB877508@ebusiness-unibw.org> Message-ID: Dear Martin, I'm sorry, because I messed up things in my first post. I didn't want to ask about gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty vs gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty, but vs gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. They both are subproperties of owl:ObjectProperty fps Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 11:22, Martin Hepp a ?crit : > Dear Fran?ois-Paul: > > The modeling proposed turns your ontology into OWL Full, since > > gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty > > is a subproperty of owl:ObjectProperty while > > gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty > > is a subproperty of owl:DatatypeProperty, and in OWL DL, no property can be both. > > If you need to model the case that people should use RDF literals (text, number, whatsoever) and URIs of enumerated values, you could define a subproperty of > > gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty > > and set the range to rdfs:Literal. > > This would allow all typed and untyped RDF Literals, which includes xsd:anyURI for URIs. > > A similar pattern can also be used when the values of URIs include classes and individuals and you don't want to break OWL DL. > > Best > > Martin Hepp > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:40 AM, Bene Rodriguez wrote: > >> Hi Fran?ois-Paul, >> >> In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both >> gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >> >> These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of >> the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are >> intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. >> >> In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these >> properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue >> >> I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. >> >> Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the >> modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this >> hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and >> gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >> >> Best, >> Bene Rodriguez >> -- >> Research Associate >> E-Business and Web Science Research Group >> Department of General Management and E-Business >> Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) >> phone: +49 89 6004-2849 >> email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org >> web: http://purl.org/beroca >> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant >> wrote: >>> Oops, >>> >>> I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: >>> >>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? >>> (I hope it is) >>> >>> fps >>> >>> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>> (I hope it is) >>>> Best, >>>> fps >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> goodrelations mailing list >>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations >> >> _______________________________________________ >> goodrelations mailing list >> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > martin hepp > e-business & web science research group > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen > > e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org > phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 > fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 > www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) > http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) > skype: mfhepp > twitter: mfhepp > > Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! > ================================================================= > * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ > > > From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Tue Nov 13 12:54:00 2012 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 06:54:00 -0500 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> <78C7D877-0ADC-487C-9F1B-B577AB877508@ebusiness-unibw.org> Message-ID: <8B06ACEF-5DFC-4A4C-9930-6B7C321ED22B@ebusiness-unibw.org> Ah! In this case, it would be better to define an independet property foo:myProperty a owl:ObjectProperty ; rdfs:domain gr:ProductOrService ; rdfs:range [ a owl:Class; owl:unionOf (gr:QuantitativeValue gr:QualitativeValue) ] . This would be the much cleaner approach, since with your approach, the range of the property is the intersection of gr:QuantitativeValue and gr:QualitativeValue, which is empty. The only downside of my proposal is that the property will not be replicated from product models to products by the GoodRelations Axioms, http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Axioms#Product_Models But you could simply modify the axiom to cater for that. Martin On Nov 13, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant wrote: > Dear Martin, > > I'm sorry, because I messed up things in my first post. I didn't want to ask about gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty > vs gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty, but vs gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. They both are subproperties of owl:ObjectProperty > > fps > > Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 11:22, Martin Hepp a ?crit : > >> Dear Fran?ois-Paul: >> >> The modeling proposed turns your ontology into OWL Full, since >> >> gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >> >> is a subproperty of owl:ObjectProperty while >> >> gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty >> >> is a subproperty of owl:DatatypeProperty, and in OWL DL, no property can be both. >> >> If you need to model the case that people should use RDF literals (text, number, whatsoever) and URIs of enumerated values, you could define a subproperty of >> >> gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty >> >> and set the range to rdfs:Literal. >> >> This would allow all typed and untyped RDF Literals, which includes xsd:anyURI for URIs. >> >> A similar pattern can also be used when the values of URIs include classes and individuals and you don't want to break OWL DL. >> >> Best >> >> Martin Hepp >> >> On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:40 AM, Bene Rodriguez wrote: >> >>> Hi Fran?ois-Paul, >>> >>> In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both >>> gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >>> >>> These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of >>> the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are >>> intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. >>> >>> In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these >>> properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue >>> >>> I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. >>> >>> Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the >>> modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this >>> hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and >>> gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >>> >>> Best, >>> Bene Rodriguez >>> -- >>> Research Associate >>> E-Business and Web Science Research Group >>> Department of General Management and E-Business >>> Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) >>> phone: +49 89 6004-2849 >>> email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org >>> web: http://purl.org/beroca >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant >>> wrote: >>>> Oops, >>>> >>>> I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: >>>> >>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>> (I hope it is) >>>> >>>> fps >>>> >>>> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>>> (I hope it is) >>>>> Best, >>>>> fps >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> goodrelations mailing list >>>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >>>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> goodrelations mailing list >>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> martin hepp >> e-business & web science research group >> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen >> >> e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org >> phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 >> fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 >> www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) >> http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) >> skype: mfhepp >> twitter: mfhepp >> >> Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! >> ================================================================= >> * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 13:51:28 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:51:28 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> Message-ID: <5C9FFD5E-DF63-4F66-8B6E-A68CB067BB93@semanlink.net> Hi Bene, thank you for your message. "A qualitative value is a predefined value for a product characteristic." I would first note that a predefined value for a product characteristic can very well also be a quantitative value. Imagine that you are selling screws. A screw has several characteristics (material, length, threading, ?), and the possible values are all standardized, identified by a code (that can be easily transformed to a URI). So, from your database of products, you can easily write triples such as: :screw1 :material :stainlessSteel ; :length :length_10_mn ; etc. and you don't really care at this point to assert that :material is a gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and that :length is a gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. You don't care, and it could be much more difficult to do: you mostly work with your codes and don't care about their actual signification in most of your processes, so the actual description of the values of properties is stored elsewhere. Maybe there you only have text descriptions (that was enough for a printed catalog, after all). So, if you want to publish your data and you have to decide early between qualitative and quantitive, you must wait to have also worked on the precise definition of each of the types of the values. You cannot begin with just: :screw1 :material :stainlessSteel ; :length :length_10_mn. :stainlessSteel rdfs:label "Stainless steel". :length_10_mn rdfs:label "10 mn". On the other hand, if it's OK to start with properties definitions such as: :length owl:subPropertyOf gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty. you can do it, you can later add to your data (and working from a source different from your product database, that is, without unnecessary coupling): :length_10_mn a r:QuantativeValue, gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement? Note that in a linked data perspective, the client discover the rdf:type of the value when dereferencing it, if she wants to: does she really need to know some kind of first approximation of the type of the value before that? Maybe I just don't see the purpose of having gr:QualitativeValue and gr:QuantitativeValue disjoint. Are there important reasons for that? > Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the > modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this I'm working on the representation of the Renault range as Linked Data, cf. http://purl.org/configurationontology We have a few hundreds of properties, all handled in the same way when it comes to configure (customize) a car: the kind (quantitative vs qualitative) of the property (and even its actual meaning, actually) is not relevant in the configuration process: choosing the engine or a level of CO2 emission is the same kind of action. Thank you for your time, Best Regards, fps Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 10:40, Bene Rodriguez a ?crit : > Hi Fran?ois-Paul, > > In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both > gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. > > These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of > the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are > intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. > > In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these > properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue > - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue > > I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. > > Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the > modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this > hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and > gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. > > Best, > Bene Rodriguez > -- > Research Associate > E-Business and Web Science Research Group > Department of General Management and E-Business > Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) > phone: +49 89 6004-2849 > email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org > web: http://purl.org/beroca > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant > wrote: >> Oops, >> >> I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: >> >> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? >> (I hope it is) >> >> fps >> >> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : >> >>> Hi, >>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >>> (I hope it is) >>> Best, >>> fps >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> goodrelations mailing list >> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 13:59:10 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:59:10 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: <8B06ACEF-5DFC-4A4C-9930-6B7C321ED22B@ebusiness-unibw.org> References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> <78C7D877-0ADC-487C-9F1B-B577AB877508@ebusiness-unibw.org> <8B06ACEF-5DFC-4A4C-9930-6B7C321ED22B@ebusiness-unibw.org> Message-ID: <8AC631AF-F8B1-4953-B195-C220C51EA156@semanlink.net> Oh, thank you (I was answering to Bene, and missed your message) OK, I see. What I don't see is why gr:QuantitativeValue and gr:QualitativeValue are disjoint. But I guess you have good reasons. Best, fps Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 12:54, Martin Hepp a ?crit : > Ah! > In this case, it would be better to define an independet property > > foo:myProperty a owl:ObjectProperty ; > rdfs:domain gr:ProductOrService ; > rdfs:range [ a owl:Class; > owl:unionOf (gr:QuantitativeValue gr:QualitativeValue) ] . > > This would be the much cleaner approach, since with your approach, the range of the property is the intersection of gr:QuantitativeValue and gr:QualitativeValue, which is empty. > > The only downside of my proposal is that the property will not be replicated from product models to products by the GoodRelations Axioms, > > http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Axioms#Product_Models > > But you could simply modify the axiom to cater for that. > > Martin > > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 6:03 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant wrote: > >> Dear Martin, >> >> I'm sorry, because I messed up things in my first post. I didn't want to ask about gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >> vs gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty, but vs gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. They both are subproperties of owl:ObjectProperty >> >> fps >> >> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 11:22, Martin Hepp a ?crit : >> >>> Dear Fran?ois-Paul: >>> >>> The modeling proposed turns your ontology into OWL Full, since >>> >>> gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >>> >>> is a subproperty of owl:ObjectProperty while >>> >>> gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty >>> >>> is a subproperty of owl:DatatypeProperty, and in OWL DL, no property can be both. >>> >>> If you need to model the case that people should use RDF literals (text, number, whatsoever) and URIs of enumerated values, you could define a subproperty of >>> >>> gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty >>> >>> and set the range to rdfs:Literal. >>> >>> This would allow all typed and untyped RDF Literals, which includes xsd:anyURI for URIs. >>> >>> A similar pattern can also be used when the values of URIs include classes and individuals and you don't want to break OWL DL. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Martin Hepp >>> >>> On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:40 AM, Bene Rodriguez wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Fran?ois-Paul, >>>> >>>> In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both >>>> gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >>>> >>>> These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of >>>> the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are >>>> intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. >>>> >>>> In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these >>>> properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: >>>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >>>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty >>>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue >>>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue >>>> >>>> I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. >>>> >>>> Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the >>>> modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this >>>> hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and >>>> gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Bene Rodriguez >>>> -- >>>> Research Associate >>>> E-Business and Web Science Research Group >>>> Department of General Management and E-Business >>>> Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) >>>> phone: +49 89 6004-2849 >>>> email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org >>>> web: http://purl.org/beroca >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant >>>> wrote: >>>>> Oops, >>>>> >>>>> I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: >>>>> >>>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>>> (I hope it is) >>>>> >>>>> fps >>>>> >>>>> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>>>> (I hope it is) >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> fps >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> goodrelations mailing list >>>>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >>>>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> goodrelations mailing list >>>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >>>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> martin hepp >>> e-business & web science research group >>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen >>> >>> e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org >>> phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 >>> fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 >>> www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) >>> http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) >>> skype: mfhepp >>> twitter: mfhepp >>> >>> Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! >>> ================================================================= >>> * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> goodrelations mailing list >> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations > > -------------------------------------------------------- > martin hepp > e-business & web science research group > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen > > e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org > phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 > fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 > www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) > http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) > skype: mfhepp > twitter: mfhepp > > Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! > ================================================================= > * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ > > > From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Tue Nov 13 14:02:14 2012 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:02:14 -0500 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: <5C9FFD5E-DF63-4F66-8B6E-A68CB067BB93@semanlink.net> References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> <5C9FFD5E-DF63-4F66-8B6E-A68CB067BB93@semanlink.net> Message-ID: Ah, now I seem to get it! Maybe we should change the textual definitions. You can of course provide enumerations of predefined *quantitative* values as well. E.g. if you standardize thread diameters (3 mm, 4 mm, 5 mm), you can define authoritative URIs for pre-defined quantities: foo:Value3MM a gr:QuantitativeValue ; rdfs:label "3 mm" ; gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; gr:hasValue 3. foo:Value4MM a gr:QuantitativeValue ; rdfs:label "4 mm" ; gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; gr:hasValue 4. foo:Value5MM a gr:QuantitativeValue ; rdfs:label "5 mm" ; gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; gr:hasValue 5. Then, simply use a subproperty of gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty foo:threadDiameter a owl:ObjectProperty ; rdfs:subPropertyOf gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty ; rdfs:label "thread diameter"@en ; rdfs:domain gr:ProductOrService ; rdfs:range gr:QuantitativeValue . That should do the trick. For exposing less structured data, we will have a new class gr:PropertyValue in the next version of GoodRelations that allows you to encode exactly what you seem to want. Release to be expect shortly. Martin On Nov 13, 2012, at 7:51 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant wrote: > Hi Bene, > > thank you for your message. > > "A qualitative value is a predefined value for a product characteristic." > > I would first note that a predefined value for a product characteristic can very well also be a quantitative value. > > Imagine that you are selling screws. A screw has several characteristics (material, length, threading, ?), and the possible values are all standardized, identified by a code (that can be easily transformed to a URI). So, from your database of products, you can easily write triples such as: > :screw1 :material :stainlessSteel ; :length :length_10_mn ; etc. > > and you don't really care at this point to assert that :material is a gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and that :length is a gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. > > You don't care, and it could be much more difficult to do: you mostly work with your codes and don't care about their actual signification in most of your processes, so the actual description of the values of properties is stored elsewhere. Maybe there you only have text descriptions (that was enough for a printed catalog, after all). > > So, if you want to publish your data and you have to decide early between qualitative and quantitive, you must wait to have also worked on the precise definition of each of the types of the values. You cannot begin with just: > :screw1 :material :stainlessSteel ; :length :length_10_mn. > :stainlessSteel rdfs:label "Stainless steel". > :length_10_mn rdfs:label "10 mn". > > On the other hand, if it's OK to start with properties definitions such as: > :length owl:subPropertyOf gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty. > > you can do it, you can later add to your data (and working from a source different from your product database, that is, without unnecessary coupling): > :length_10_mn a r:QuantativeValue, gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement? > > Note that in a linked data perspective, the client discover the rdf:type of the value when dereferencing it, if she wants to: does she really need to know some kind of first approximation of the type of the value before that? > > Maybe I just don't see the purpose of having gr:QualitativeValue and gr:QuantitativeValue disjoint. Are there important reasons for that? > >> Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the >> modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this > > I'm working on the representation of the Renault range as Linked Data, cf. > http://purl.org/configurationontology > > We have a few hundreds of properties, all handled in the same way when it comes to configure (customize) a car: the kind (quantitative vs qualitative) of the property (and even its actual meaning, actually) is not relevant in the configuration process: choosing the engine or a level of CO2 emission is the same kind of action. > > Thank you for your time, > > Best Regards, > > fps > > > Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 10:40, Bene Rodriguez a ?crit : > >> Hi Fran?ois-Paul, >> >> In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both >> gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >> >> These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of >> the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are >> intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. >> >> In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these >> properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue >> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue >> >> I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. >> >> Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the >> modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this >> hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and >> gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >> >> Best, >> Bene Rodriguez >> -- >> Research Associate >> E-Business and Web Science Research Group >> Department of General Management and E-Business >> Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) >> phone: +49 89 6004-2849 >> email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org >> web: http://purl.org/beroca >> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant >> wrote: >>> Oops, >>> >>> I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: >>> >>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? >>> (I hope it is) >>> >>> fps >>> >>> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>> (I hope it is) >>>> Best, >>>> fps >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> goodrelations mailing list >>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations > > > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 14:22:32 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:22:32 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?gr=3AqualitativeProductOrService?= =?windows-1252?q?Property_/_gr=3AquantitativeProductOrServiceProperty_=28?= =?windows-1252?q?was_Re=3A_=85_/_gr=3AdatatypeProductOrServiceProperty=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> <5C9FFD5E-DF63-4F66-8B6E-A68CB067BB93@semanlink.net> Message-ID: I had seen that we can have predefined quantitative values. But this doesn't solve my concern: at one point in time, (now, still working) I'm ready to publish the following: :myScrew foo:threadDiameter foo:Value3MM. foo:Value3MM rdfs:label "3 mm". But, I'm not yet ready to state that foo:threadDiameter rdfs:subPropertyOf gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. something which, BTW, has no real value for me. I'd be perfectly happy with foo:threadDiameter rdfs:subPropertyOf gr:productOrServiceProperty. fps Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 14:02, Martin Hepp a ?crit : > Ah, now I seem to get it! Maybe we should change the textual definitions. > > You can of course provide enumerations of predefined *quantitative* values as well. E.g. if you standardize thread diameters (3 mm, 4 mm, 5 mm), you can define authoritative URIs for pre-defined quantities: > > foo:Value3MM a gr:QuantitativeValue ; > rdfs:label "3 mm" ; > gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; > gr:hasValue 3. > > foo:Value4MM a gr:QuantitativeValue ; > rdfs:label "4 mm" ; > gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; > gr:hasValue 4. > > foo:Value5MM a gr:QuantitativeValue ; > rdfs:label "5 mm" ; > gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; > gr:hasValue 5. > > Then, simply use a subproperty of gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty > > foo:threadDiameter a owl:ObjectProperty ; > rdfs:subPropertyOf gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty ; > rdfs:label "thread diameter"@en ; > rdfs:domain gr:ProductOrService ; > rdfs:range gr:QuantitativeValue . > > That should do the trick. > > For exposing less structured data, we will have a new class gr:PropertyValue in the next version of GoodRelations that allows you to encode exactly what you seem to want. Release to be expect shortly. > > Martin > > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 7:51 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant wrote: > > >> Hi Bene, >> >> thank you for your message. >> >> "A qualitative value is a predefined value for a product characteristic." >> >> I would first note that a predefined value for a product characteristic can very well also be a quantitative value. >> >> Imagine that you are selling screws. A screw has several characteristics (material, length, threading, ?), and the possible values are all standardized, identified by a code (that can be easily transformed to a URI). So, from your database of products, you can easily write triples such as: >> :screw1 :material :stainlessSteel ; :length :length_10_mn ; etc. >> >> and you don't really care at this point to assert that :material is a gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and that :length is a gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >> >> You don't care, and it could be much more difficult to do: you mostly work with your codes and don't care about their actual signification in most of your processes, so the actual description of the values of properties is stored elsewhere. Maybe there you only have text descriptions (that was enough for a printed catalog, after all). >> >> So, if you want to publish your data and you have to decide early between qualitative and quantitive, you must wait to have also worked on the precise definition of each of the types of the values. You cannot begin with just: >> :screw1 :material :stainlessSteel ; :length :length_10_mn. >> :stainlessSteel rdfs:label "Stainless steel". >> :length_10_mn rdfs:label "10 mn". >> >> On the other hand, if it's OK to start with properties definitions such as: >> :length owl:subPropertyOf gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >> >> you can do it, you can later add to your data (and working from a source different from your product database, that is, without unnecessary coupling): >> :length_10_mn a r:QuantativeValue, gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement? >> >> Note that in a linked data perspective, the client discover the rdf:type of the value when dereferencing it, if she wants to: does she really need to know some kind of first approximation of the type of the value before that? >> >> Maybe I just don't see the purpose of having gr:QualitativeValue and gr:QuantitativeValue disjoint. Are there important reasons for that? >> >>> Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the >>> modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this >> >> I'm working on the representation of the Renault range as Linked Data, cf. >> http://purl.org/configurationontology >> >> We have a few hundreds of properties, all handled in the same way when it comes to configure (customize) a car: the kind (quantitative vs qualitative) of the property (and even its actual meaning, actually) is not relevant in the configuration process: choosing the engine or a level of CO2 emission is the same kind of action. >> >> Thank you for your time, >> >> Best Regards, >> >> fps >> >> >> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 10:40, Bene Rodriguez a ?crit : >> >>> Hi Fran?ois-Paul, >>> >>> In principle, it is NOT OK for a property to be a subproperty of both >>> gr:qualitative-, and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >>> >>> These two properties, (or rather their expected values, an instance of >>> the class gr:Qualitative-, gr:QuantitativeValue respectively) are >>> intended to be disjoint or mutually exclusive by definition. >>> >>> In case it helps, there is more info about the typical usage of these >>> properties and their expected values on the GoodRelations wiki: >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QualitativeValue >>> - http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#QuantitativeValue >>> >>> I could point to many more usage examples of these two properties if needed. >>> >>> Also, in case you can share, it would be interesting to know the >>> modeling problem that you were trying to represent via this >>> hypothetical subproperty of both gr:qualitative-, and >>> gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty. >>> >>> Best, >>> Bene Rodriguez >>> -- >>> Research Associate >>> E-Business and Web Science Research Group >>> Department of General Management and E-Business >>> Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) >>> phone: +49 89 6004-2849 >>> email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org >>> web: http://purl.org/beroca >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Fran?ois-Paul Servant >>> wrote: >>>> Oops, >>>> >>>> I messed things up when writing my question. Here is what I wanted to ask: >>>> >>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subProperty of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:quantitativeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>> (I hope it is) >>>> >>>> fps >>>> >>>> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 00:32, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> is it OK for a property used to describe a product to be subClass of both gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty and gr:datatypeProductOrServiceProperty? >>>>> (I hope it is) >>>>> Best, >>>>> fps >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> goodrelations mailing list >>>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >>>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> goodrelations mailing list >> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org >> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > martin hepp > e-business & web science research group > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen > > e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org > phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 > fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 > www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) > http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) > skype: mfhepp > twitter: mfhepp > > Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! > ================================================================= > * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ > > > From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 15:13:43 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:13:43 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?exposing_less_structured_data_?= =?windows-1252?q?=28was_Re=3A__gr=3AqualitativeProductOrServiceProperty?= =?windows-1252?q?=85=29?= In-Reply-To: References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> <5C9FFD5E-DF63-4F66-8B6E-A68CB067BB93@semanlink.net> Message-ID: <8CC1C86C-6E93-4844-B935-84F4DB8D752B@semanlink.net> Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 14:02, Martin Hepp a ?crit : > For exposing less structured data, we will have a new class gr:PropertyValue in the next version of GoodRelations that allows you to encode exactly what you seem to want. Release to be expect shortly. do you mean what is described at http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Documentation/Product_features (but not in the specification page)?: Hence, GoodRelations from release 2012-08-01 onwards supports a novel pattern based on gr:ProductFeature and gr:Feature that allows publishing arbitrary property-value pairs for product features. schema:feature [ a schema:ProductFeature ; schema:propertyName "Power supply" ; schema:propertyValue "110-220" ; schema:unitText "Volts" ] ; you can imagine that I like this kind of pattern. Will it be possible to write something like: x:myScrew gr:feature foo:Value3MM. foo:Value3MM a gr:ProductFeature ; gr:featurePropertyId foo:threadDiameter ; // or maybe instead: a foo:ThreadDiameter ? rdfs:label "3 mm" ; gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; gr:hasValue 3. That would be very close to what we have in the configuration ontology! (with Specification == ProductFeature) It allows for incremental refinement of the data. For instance, you can start with just foo:Value3MM a gr:ProductFeature ; gr:featurePropertyId foo:threadDiameter ; // or maybe instead: a foo:ThreadDiameter ? rdfs:label "3 mm" . Best, fps -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fps at semanlink.net Tue Nov 13 15:30:17 2012 From: fps at semanlink.net (=?windows-1252?Q?Fran=E7ois-Paul_Servant?=) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:30:17 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] =?windows-1252?q?exposing_less_structured_data_?= =?windows-1252?q?=28was_Re=3A__gr=3AqualitativeProductOrServiceProperty?= =?windows-1252?q?=85=29?= In-Reply-To: <8CC1C86C-6E93-4844-B935-84F4DB8D752B@semanlink.net> References: <529C7BB7-8C4F-4818-A0F6-454F91B73B4C@semanlink.net> <5C9FFD5E-DF63-4F66-8B6E-A68CB067BB93@semanlink.net> <8CC1C86C-6E93-4844-B935-84F4DB8D752B@semanlink.net> Message-ID: Le 13 nov. 2012 ? 15:13, Fran?ois-Paul Servant a ?crit : > you can imagine that I like this kind of pattern. Will it be possible to write something like: > > x:myScrew gr:feature foo:Value3MM. > > foo:Value3MM a gr:ProductFeature ; > gr:featurePropertyId foo:threadDiameter ; // or maybe instead: a foo:ThreadDiameter ? > rdfs:label "3 mm" ; > gr:hasUnitOfMeasurement "MMT"^^xsd:string ; > gr:hasValue 3. > > That would be very close to what we have in the configuration ontology! (with Specification == ProductFeature) > It allows for incremental refinement of the data. For instance, you can start with just > foo:Value3MM a gr:ProductFeature ; > gr:featurePropertyId foo:threadDiameter ; // or maybe instead: a foo:ThreadDiameter ? > rdfs:label "3 mm" . an interesting point, from the consumer point of view, is that it is easy to list all the features of a product (its RDF description can contain many other properties) From osma.suominen at aalto.fi Tue Nov 27 11:34:41 2012 From: osma.suominen at aalto.fi (Osma Suominen) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:34:41 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Can gr:Location be used for virtual locations? Message-ID: <50B49741.1040307@aalto.fi> Hello, I'm developing a vocabulary/ontology for describing public services. The goal is to express things like: * this kindergarten at this location provides day care services for families living within this municipality; its opening hours are X, location Y and contact information Z * the cities A,B,C together offer this free help line that residents can call to get medical assistance; the service is actually provided by medical company X (paid for by the cities) * the city library in X provides library services at this location; on its website at URL Y, you can also borrow e-books as a self-service As you might guess, many parts of the ontology are heavily influenced by, and derived from, GoodRelations. It is possible to express most of the important things in this domain using GR constructs such as gr:Offering, gr:BusinessEntity and probably some form of gr:ProductOrService subclasses. There will also be extensions detailing the various relationships between organizations (e.g. who pays for what) and for accessibility information. What I'm struggling with is that some of the services are provided in non-physical service points/channels, i.e. on the web or by phone. In many cases, the "same" service is available through more than one channel. Opening hours are relevant for both physical locations and phone services, in rare cases even for websites. I'd like to use gr:availableAtOrFrom and gr:Location to express also these virtual service points and then (optionally) attach opening hours information to them using gr:hasOpeningHoursSpecification. But part the gr:Location description says "Locations are characterized by an address or geographical position and a set of opening hour specifications for various days of the week." In my public service case, the non-physical service points do not have a meaningful geographical address or position. Instead the "location" is a URL of a web site or a phone number. I can imagine similar use cases in the e-commerce domain that GR is aimed at, for example companies that sell downloads (magazine articles, music, creditworthiness reports...) on the web. So finally to my questions: 1. Do you think it would still be fine to use (a subclass of) gr:Location to model these? 2. If yes, could the description of gr:Location be amended to include also non-physical locations offering products and services? Thanks in advance, Osma -- Osma Suominen | Osma.Suominen at aalto.fi | +358 40 5255 882 Aalto University, Department of Media Technology, Semantic Computing Research Group Room 2541, Otaniementie 17, Espoo, Finland; P.O. Box 15500, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland From beroca at gmail.com Thu Nov 29 01:20:38 2012 From: beroca at gmail.com (Bene Rodriguez) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 01:20:38 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Can gr:Location be used for virtual locations? In-Reply-To: <50B49741.1040307@aalto.fi> References: <50B49741.1040307@aalto.fi> Message-ID: Hi Osma, Interesting modeling scenario. I see the motivation to the changes you propose to gr:Location, however as you mention, gr:Location is intended to represent a real, physical location. In that sense, under the current definition, regarding question: 1. Subclassing gr:Location to represent non-physical locations can be seen as contradictory because "a non-physical location" is not really a subtype/subclass of a "physical location". 2. I believe changes to the definition of gr:Location (to represent both physical and non-physical locations) are not being considered for now, afaik... However, there is an approach that could address your modeling scenario and that would fit into the current GRs schema. You could extend the class gr:DeliveryMethod with new individuals (or even classes, depending on your ultimate needs) to represent the means of providing (offering) the product or service that you mention (day care, medical assistance, library), i.e. something along the line of foo:DeliveryMethodPhone, or foo:DeliveryMethodWeb, etc. You could also add to that, an additional extension similar to the approach used in the Accommodation Ontology (a curated extension to GRs in that domain -- see: http://purl.org/acco/ns#) with the object property acco:availabilityTimes that relates a specific accommodation feature with the particular gr:OpeningHoursSpecification (some examples here: http://ontologies.sti-innsbruck.at/acco/ns.html#Examples). It would take some more time and a bit more information about the modeling scenarios, to bring together the conceptual elements of these extensions to the GRs ontology to craft examples in the context of the 3 modeling cases you mention, (day care, medical assistance, library), however in the meantime, I thought I would point out these two ideas in case they help. Best, Bene Rodriguez -- Research Associate E-Business and Web Science Research Group Department of General Management and E-Business Universitaet der Bundeswehr Munich (Germany) phone: +49 89 6004-2849 email: benedicto.rodriguez at ebusiness-unibw.org web: http://purl.org/beroca On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Osma Suominen wrote: > Hello, > > I'm developing a vocabulary/ontology for describing public services. The > goal is to express things like: > > * this kindergarten at this location provides day care services for > families living within this municipality; its opening hours are X, location > Y and contact information Z > * the cities A,B,C together offer this free help line that residents can > call to get medical assistance; the service is actually provided by medical > company X (paid for by the cities) > * the city library in X provides library services at this location; on its > website at URL Y, you can also borrow e-books as a self-service > > As you might guess, many parts of the ontology are heavily influenced by, > and derived from, GoodRelations. It is possible to express most of the > important things in this domain using GR constructs such as gr:Offering, > gr:BusinessEntity and probably some form of gr:ProductOrService subclasses. > There will also be extensions detailing the various relationships between > organizations (e.g. who pays for what) and for accessibility information. > > What I'm struggling with is that some of the services are provided in > non-physical service points/channels, i.e. on the web or by phone. In many > cases, the "same" service is available through more than one channel. > Opening hours are relevant for both physical locations and phone services, > in rare cases even for websites. > > I'd like to use gr:availableAtOrFrom and gr:Location to express also these > virtual service points and then (optionally) attach opening hours > information to them using gr:hasOpeningHoursSpecification. But part the > gr:Location description says "Locations are characterized by an address or > geographical position and a set of opening hour specifications for various > days of the week." In my public service case, the non-physical service > points do not have a meaningful geographical address or position. Instead > the "location" is a URL of a web site or a phone number. I can imagine > similar use cases in the e-commerce domain that GR is aimed at, for example > companies that sell downloads (magazine articles, music, creditworthiness > reports...) on the web. > > So finally to my questions: > > 1. Do you think it would still be fine to use (a subclass of) gr:Location to > model these? > > 2. If yes, could the description of gr:Location be amended to include also > non-physical locations offering products and services? > > Thanks in advance, > Osma > > -- > Osma Suominen | Osma.Suominen at aalto.fi | +358 40 5255 882 > Aalto University, Department of Media Technology, Semantic Computing > Research Group > Room 2541, Otaniementie 17, Espoo, Finland; P.O. Box 15500, FI-00076 Aalto, > Finland > > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations From r at r-s.ro Fri Nov 30 14:56:45 2012 From: r at r-s.ro (Radu Silaghi) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:56:45 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] [ Google ] Custom Search Message-ID: Hello, I would love to have a have a custom search engine in http://www.heppnetz.de/projects/goodrelations/ and related domains/subdomains like wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org many thanks, Radu Silaghi -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: