[Data-modeling] "Mentions" and "Mentioned In"

[Ed Laurent]

For these other examples, it seems you would want to keep the context as
well as document the mention.

For general mentions, your "Mentions" and "Mentioned In" as reciprocal
properties sounds good. I'd suggest including "Written work" in your "Work
mentioned" type (although in this case I would call it "Mentioning work" or
"Source of mention" or...). Your "Topic mentioned" type could be included in
various other types that defined their context. For example, "Location
mentioned in fiction" could include "Topic mentioned" and "Location" with a
link to "Mentioning work of fiction" (or something similar), that includes
"Mentioning work" and "Book". The literary genre of "Fiction" would need to
be added by hand or script afterwords though.

Just some thoughts. In any case, my opinion is that these are distinct types
that are worth modeling but should not be included as properties of "Written
work" (which is included in "Book") because that would be too limiting for
them. You want to include them in your more use-specific types so they need
to stand alone.

-Ed

P.S. There are several "mentions" in the Aubrey-Maturin base:
http://aubreymaturin.freebase.com/ but they don't include a general
"Mention" type. They probably should based on this discussion.



On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Alf Eaton <lists at hubmed.org> wrote:

> I'm actually thinking of more than just people, though that was the
> most obvious example. Other examples could be "proteins mentioned in
> scientific papers", "locations mentioned in fiction", or "buildings
> mentioned in songs", etc ...
>
> alf
>
> 2009/2/6 Ed Laurent <spatial.db at gmail.com>:
> > I commented already in your "Mentions" discussion:
> > http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/book/scholarly_work?domain=%2Fbook
> >
> > Now that I see how you are using this, I'm wondering if the "Acknowledged
> > people" property of scholarly work would suffice if the description was
> > broadened to include acknowledgments anywhere in the work:
> > http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/book/scholarly_work?domain=%2Fbook
> >
> > -Ed
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Alf Eaton <lists at hubmed.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> I needed a way to link topics to the works they were mentioned in, so
> >> created two prototype types:
> >>
> >> Work-Mentioned (equivalent to Work)
> >> <http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/user/freebass/default_domain/work>
> >> and Topic-Mentioned (equivalent to Topic)
> >>
> >> <
> http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/user/freebass/default_domain/topic_mentioned
> >,
> >>
> >> adding "Mentions" and "Mentioned In" as reciprocal properties for those
> >> types.
> >>
> >> Here's a view making use of these properties:
> >>
> >> <
> http://www.freebase.com/view/user/freebass/default_domain/views/the_characters_of_physical_law
> >
> >> derived from the "Mentioned In" links shown here:
> >>
> >> <
> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/the_character_of_physical_law?domain=%2Fuser%2Ffreebass%2Fdefault_domain
> >
> >>
> >> If this makes sense, perhaps these reciprocal properties could be
> >> added to the official "Work" and "Topic" types?
> >>
> >> alf
> >>
> >> P.S. I just noticed that there isn't an overarching "Work" type, just
> >> "Written Work", "Book", "Film", etc. so the "Mentions" property would
> >> have to be added to each of those, and "Mentioned In" would have to
> >> allow those as targets.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freebase.com/pipermail/data-modeling/attachments/20090206/f752e767/attachment-0001.htm