[Data-modeling] structure2: using the Project schema

[Ed Laurent]

A couple quick suggestions about this. First, it would be nice to have a
common "Project" type that is commonly applicable. Therefore it would be
helpful to consider a few use cases outside of engineering projects. A few
that have been mentioned:

http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/base/abcbirds/conservation_project
http://www.freebase.com/view/base/engineering/engineering_project
http://www.freebase.com/view/base/virginiabroadband/stimulus_request
http://www.freebase.com/view/user/sandos/research/research_project

Second, I request a start and end date added to the "Project participation"
CVT like I modeled here:
http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/base/conservationaction/participation
Participation is probably common enough to extend to other bases so it might
be better placed as an included type in Project as a "Participation subject"
or "Participation activity" property/type of the "Project participation"
CVT.

Third, project funding often comes in waves so it would be nice to have a
CVT property that documents the dated amount as well as a property to store
the "Funding source" (e.g., grant ID, foundation name, person, company).
This CVT would probably replace "Actual costs" which should be renamed to
"Funding" or something similar. See how I've modeled this for consideration:
http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/base/conservationaction/program_financial_support

Fourth, many of the projects I document are part of larger programs. I could
see using the "Project focus" property for this if the definition (and
possibly the name too) was expanded to be more inclusive of various
programs. See my Coordinated program type for some examples of how I modeled
this:
http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/base/conservationaction/coordinated_program

-Ed


On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 2:13 PM, brendan <brendan at metaweb.com> wrote:

> As admin of the current commons architecture domain, I agree with the
> issues you have brought up, the time for refactor has arrived :)
> This is a sub-thread, since there are several different things to discuss,
> perhaps we could observe the Subject line format above ("structure2:
> <topic>).  I hope to have conversations on this list drive incremental
> changes to the existing structure type (and assoc. types).
>
> I, too, am concerned about the complexity of using the project
> types  (created by Kirrily): in particular, that something pretty
> fundamental, which architect designed a building, will no longer be visible
> in the freebase UI (or any simple topic view template that someone is likely
> to create in acre or elsewhere) Take an example:
>
> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/royal_festival_hall
>
> To summarize: The existing structure type has a simple property:
> "Architect". I agree that this is too simple.
>
> The new structure2 has no such property but, rather, will be co-typed
> "Project focus". That type has a property "Projects" which indicates which
> projects this structure is the focus of (e.g.
> http://www.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f800000000aa8e831)<http://www.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f800000000aa8e831%29>  That topic (a "Project") the has a "Participants" property which points to
> a "Project Participation" type, a CVT which has the simple slot for the
> person and their role (e.g. architect)
>
> freebase.com's client browser handles an extra level of indirection
> gracefully (properties that point to CVT's). In the project model, the
> architect is out one level too far to be included in the topic view for a
> building/structure.  Don't get me wrong, I think the project schema is
> sound/correct.  I'm just wondering if we could strike a better balance
> between correctness and complexity here.
>
> Kirrily, am I off the mark here?
>
> Brendan
>
>
>
> On Feb 24, 2009, at 1:58 AM, Iain Sproat wrote:
>
> Over the past day or two spencermountain and I (sprocketonline) have been
> drafting up some proposed changes to the Structure type in the Architect
> commons.
> The work-in-progress draft schema, called structure2, can be found at
> http://architecture2.freebase.com/type/schema/base/architecture2/structure2
> We've been discussing this previously on Freebase discussions here<http://www.freebase.com/discuss/threads/guid/9202a8c04000641f800000000aa9c439?domain=/architecture>
>  and here<http://architecture2.freebase.com/discuss/threads/guid/9202a8c04000641f800000000af066ef?domain=/base/architecture2>
>  .
>
> I had been running into a large number of edge cases and issues with the
> current structure type in the architect commons.  For example, how to note
> engineers who weren't structural; how to note role differences between lead
> architect and associate architect; design/contractor teams which changed
> half way through construction; how to note a facility manager; difference
> between freehold owners and leasehold owners etc. etc..  Also structures
> which changed functions or were damaged and/or have been renovated/extended
> are causing some issues.
>
> Separately, skud had created a Projects<http://www.freebase.com/type/schema/base/projects/project?domain=/base/projects>base, and this seems to fit well with building/structure design projects and
> construction projects.
>
> I've made extensive use of the project base in the draft structure2 schema.
>  We've also tried to fix some of the other areas by introducing a lot of new
> CVTs into structure2.  The problem I can see with structure2 is that it
> might be too complex/UI-unfriendly with things being not immediately obvious
> (e.g. architects and engineers are noted in a project topic, not the
> structure topic ->
> http://architecture2.freebase.com/view/base/architecture2/views/construction_projects
> ).
>
> Your comments please.....
>
> Iain (sprocketonline)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090226/85eb7746/attachment-0001.htm