[Data-modeling] [Developers] Modeling question

[Robert Cook]

On Jan 8, 2008, at 6:35 AM, Kavitha Srinivas wrote:

> Ok, I guess I missed some of the discussion on this topic.  This  
> might be a very OWL oriented view of the world, but I don't see why  
> you cannot embed a more specific hierarchy under the more general  
> concept of "Product".  So each company can have an optional property  
> (call it what you will) that produces a Product (or any other name  
> you prefer).  Products can vary widely, from drugs to computer  
> models to a box of kleenex.  Yes, Product is a very broad, and  
> abstract class, so I do see what you mean.  But if you choose to  
> link only to web links from a company to the products it produces,  
> don't you lose the ability to navigate from a company to its key  
> products?


I see your point.  In this case, though, the semantics of products  
could be much coarser grained.  Instead of the "quadra 650", Apple's  
product schema could point to product categories like "personal  
computers, personal audio devices, computer operating systems and  
mobile phones", among probably a dozen more.  This would be a very  
useful de-normalization, intended for a different purpose and audience  
(investors, for instance.)

R

>
> Kavitha
>
>
> On Jan 7, 2008, at 10:36 PM, Robert Cook wrote:
>
>> http://www.freebase.com/view/macintosh_quadra
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080108/ad82d422/attachment.htm