[Data-modeling] A proposal for consumer products

Tue Dec 23 21:07:32 UTC 2008

I hate to keep bringing this up, but the motorcycle parts models have many
of the same characteristics everyone is converging on. There is a separate
model for the manufactured part and the packaged part, part type for finding
similar parts, etc. The only reason I used part number instead of product
name is because the bolt that holds your kickstand to the frame of your bike
is named by part number and often sold under the guise of a different part
number. Product names (e.g., "Honda super strong kickstand for CB model
years 1980-1983", Third Generation iPod shuffle) would be just as good if
they exist.

Here is the motorcycle part gallery:
http://www.freebase.com/view/base/motorcycle/views/motorcycle_parts

If you think of a petcock (regulates gas flow from tank to engine) as a type
of product:
http://www.freebase.com/view/en/petcock

There are specific instances of petcock products that are manufactured
somewhere and by somebody and have a name of some kind ("Motorcycle part
number (manufacturer)):
http://www.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f8000000006fb6ba5
These products might be bundled on other products before sale (i.e.,
original equipment on X) or sold to replace or enhance other products (i.e.,
aftermarket part on X)

The product might be sold by another company, possibly under a different
name ("Motorcycle part number (retailer)):
http://www.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f8000000006fb6d34

Generic phylogeny such as "Contains product", "Contained by product",
"Replaces product", etc is possible. However, product phylogeny should be
linked to the products, not to their brands. Brands should have their own
phylogeny and products can have a "product line(s)" property that links to
brand.

I can see reason to simplify the model so that product = instance of product
line of brand, but don't think it is possible to implement for anything
other than simple products manufactured and sold by a single company.

-Ed

On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 3:31 PM, evening0star <evening0star at gmail.com>wrote:

> Perhaps add to this Product Type so you can link to toothpaste, software,
> car, phone, etc?  So you separate "Toohpaste" from the "Crest Toothpaste".
> just an idea.
>
> In response to Cook, I think why it would be good to have a "generic"
> consumer product type is for products that haven't been specifically typed
> yet.  Perhaps for computers there's a specific computer type, and same for
> books, etc.  But if you wanted to capture who makes toothpaste, and the
> various types of toothpastes, you could use this general product type.
>
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Kirrily Robert <kirrily at metaweb.com>wrote:
>
>> OK, how about this.  Four types:
>> * Company (or some company-like type, eg. Product manufacturer, intended
>> as a co-type with company)
>> * Brand
>> * Product line
>> * Consumer Product
>>
>> All four of those have properties for the other three.  Brand and Product
>> Line have a phylogeny pattern which allows for "Includes" and "Included by".
>>
>> Apple is a company.  It has a brand "iPhone", which is also a product line
>> (done with co-typing the iPhone topic).  The iPhone 3G 8GB is a product
>> whose brand and product line are iPhone.  As an example of the phylogeny
>> pattern Apple's brand "iPod" includes a sub-brand "iPod Shuffle".
>>
>> P&G is a company, which has a brands "Crest" and "Charmin".  It has
>> product lines "Crest toothpaste", "Crest toothbrushes", etc.  "Crest
>> Whitening Minty Fresh Toothpaste" (I made that name up) is a product in the
>> Crest toothpaste line, with the Crest brand.
>>
>> Adobe is a company that has a lot of products, but looking at
>> http://www.adobe.com/products/ I can't see much in the way of brands
>> other than the Adobe brand itself.  But they do have product lines like
>> "Creative Suite".
>>
>> For very small companies or producers, you can ignore Product Line and
>> Brand.  For instance, Joe Smith builds "Joe's worm farms" and sells them at
>> his local farmers market.  There is no Product Line or Brand there, just a
>> producer and a product.
>>
>> Having links from all those four types to each other will introduce some
>> denormalisation, but it seems to me like the only way to capture the various
>> ways these things work in different industries.
>>
>> K.
>>
>>
>> On Dec 23, 2008, at 11:39 AM, evening0star wrote:
>>
>>
>> Appliances, however, don't line up as easily.  Take Siemens and GE, who
>> both make refrigerators.  GE has a couple of different lines (which they
>> call Brands), like GE Profile, GE Monogram, etc:
>> http://www.geappliances.com/products/brands/.  So if we use GE Profile,
>> you'll see that there are side-by-side refrigerators, top-freezer models,
>> etc.  And then within those categories you have specific products, or
>> models, like the "GE Profile 42" Built-In Side-by-Side Refrigerator with
>> Dispenser" model # PSB42YSXSS, and there's another one "GE Profile™ 42"
>> Built-In Side-by-Side Refrigerator with Dispenser" but model # PSB42YGXSV.
>>
>> Siemens, however, doesn't seem to have multiple models per type of
>> refrigerator (for lack of a better way to put it).  They have a 36"
>> counter-depth, a 36" french door, etc:
>> http://www.siemens-home.com/Appliances-Kitchen-Cooking_Refrigerators-Freezers.
>>
>>
>> Then take a look at Mitsubishi Electric's home theater TVs:
>> http://mitsubishi-tv.com.  These are similar to Siemens in that they
>> have more than one model for a "46" Diamond Premium Flat Panel TV".
>>
>> Of course there's also software, and Adobe is an "easy" example.
>> http://www.adobe.com/products/
>>
>> And, frankly, I'm afraid to look into food products! :)  Though I can give
>> you one example I ran into the other day: Vermont Smoke & Cure is a food
>> brand that is owned by Farmer's Diner, and has various products within the
>> Smoke & Cure name (here's a link to their bacon:
>> http://www.vtsmokeandcure.com/bacon-natural-c-249.html).
>>
>> So I hope these examples help people think about modeling this area.  What
>> is the brand for each of these, versus the product, versus the company,
>> versus specific models, etc.  And then maybe we can start referencing
>> specific examples so we can talk on the same page (like brand).
>>
>> evening
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Robert Cook <robert at metaweb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OK, I think we're trying to represent the "brand" more than the branding.
>>>  Apple, Dell, Chevrolet, Mentos, Levalor are all brands.  Some (perhaps
>>> all?) are companies, but that's a co-type on the same topics.
>>> I should have been clearer about Apple as designer, which although often
>>> is the same as the brand (if it's a company or .  I don't think that's part
>>> of brand at all.  That's probably a property into itself (should one want to
>>> split that far.)  Several car models have designers who are recognizable
>>> people.
>>>
>>> R
>>>
>>>  On Dec 22, 2008, at 1:28 PM, evening0star wrote:
>>>
>>>  Well, there's a brand, and then there's branding.  The branding on
>>> Chevrolet has changed over the years (colors and fonts used, tag lines,
>>> logos,etc), but the brand/division/product of Chevrolet hasn't in the sense
>>> that it hasn't changed names, still is basically the same kind of product,
>>> etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> *> Apple is the brand for the Macbook  They are also the designer.  They
>>> are definitely not the manufacturer.*
>>>
>>>
>>> We have to be careful between brand and company.   "Apple Inc" is the
>>> company that makes/designs/owns these products.  A brand can't design things
>>> - it is a representation of a company or product/service.
>>>
>>> Are we having fun yet?? :)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Tim Kientzle <tim at metaweb.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Some of the clearest examples come from the car industry: "Chevrolet"
>>>> is a brand owned by the General Motors Corporation.  "Chevrolet" is
>>>> not a company nor is it a particular product.  (But, of course,
>>>> "Suburban" is also a brand, as is "General Motors Corporation."  The
>>>> identity is not the same as the product or company, even when it has
>>>> the same name.  The White Knight should have been in advertising. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 22, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Kirrily Robert wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Dec 22, 2008, at 12:46 PM, Mohammad Al-Ubaydli wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Sorry if I am ignorant on this but would "Brand" be better than
>>>> >> "manufacturer"? I am guessing you already went through this with
>>>> >> your business guys and was just hoping to learn why the still expect
>>>> >> manufacturer.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'd better let a marketing person explain it, but as I understand it,
>>>> > a brand is a marketing device and is not the same as the company.
>>>> >
>>>> > Wikipedia describes brands as: "A brand is a collection of symbols,
>>>> > experiences and associations connected with a product, a service, a
>>>> > person or any other artefact or entity."  So for instance, the Coca
>>>> > Cola brand involves red and white colours, the swoopy logo, the phrase
>>>> > "Enjoy Coca Cola", and so on.
>>>> >
>>>> > See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brand and
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_(business)<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_%28business%29>
>>>> >  for example.
>>>> >
>>>> > K.
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Kirrily Robert
>>>> > Freebase Community Director
>>>> > kirrily at metaweb.com
>>>> > http://freebase.com/
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > Data-modeling mailing list
>>>> > Data-modeling at freebase.com
>>>> > http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Data-modeling mailing list
>>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Data-modeling mailing list
>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Data-modeling mailing list
>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Data-modeling mailing list
>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>
>>
>>   --
>>  Kirrily Robert
>> Freebase Community Director
>> kirrily at metaweb.com
>> http://freebase.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Data-modeling mailing list
>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Data-modeling mailing list
> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freebase.com/pipermail/data-modeling/attachments/20081223/15a0704a/attachment-0001.htm 