[Data-modeling] Products with ingredients

[Tom Morris]

I'm with Faye.  It seems very weird to have rice flour and rice so strongly
related.  I don't consider rice flour to be a generalization of rice at all.
 About the only places where they would potentially interchangeable would be
for nutritional information or for allergies.  You might be able to
substitute basmati rice for jasmine rice if you didn't care too much about
the difference in texture or maintaining cultural authenticity, but if you
substituted rice flour (of any variety), you'd be in a whole heap of
trouble.

The examples in the schema descriptions (yay for descriptions!) seem to have
the same problem.  You can get lavender oil out of a lavender plant, but
they aren't generalizations of each other.  If anything, the generalization
would be aromatic oil or fragrance or something.

For most applications, it's more useful to have things linked together
because of common properties rather than because they are made from the same
source material or by the same process.

-1 for making this even more obscure by linking in Material.

Tom

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Faye Harris <faye at metaweb.com> wrote:

>  Very cool!
>
> That rice flour is called a "variety of" rice in the schema is indeed very
> odd.
>
> Based on the sandbox examples, this schema seems to use "variety of" for
> two types of relationships:
>     1) variety of, e.g. brown rice is a "variety of" rice
>     2) derived from, e.g. rice flour is "derived from" rice
>
> The former relationship is categorical, the latter relates to
> post-processing.
>
> -- Faye
>
>
>
> Jeff Prucher wrote:
>
> OK, I've got the double-phylogeny pattern working now. Take a look here:http://www.sandbox-freebase.com/type/schema/business/product_ingredient
>
> And here's a table view of the ingredients of a breakfast cereal I found in
> the office kitchen:http://www.sandbox-freebase.com/view/user/jeff/default_domain/views/cranberr
> y_almond_crunch_ingredients
>
> I'm not really happy with the "variety of" and "generalization of" names,
> but I'm not coming up with anything better. Any suggestions would be most
> welcome.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com
> [mailto:data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com <data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com>] On Behalf Of Jeff Prucher
> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 11:42 AM
> To: Freebase data modeling mailing list
> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
>
>
> ----- "Faye Harris" <faye at metaweb.com> <faye at metaweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>  From: "Faye Harris" <faye at metaweb.com> <faye at metaweb.com>
> To: "Freebase data modeling mailing list"
>
>
>  <data-modeling at freebase.com> <data-modeling at freebase.com>
>
>  Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:59:19 PM GMT -08:00
>
>
>  US/Canada Pacific
>
>
>  Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
>
> Jeff Prucher wrote:
>
>
>  ----- "Robert Cook" <robert at metaweb.com> <robert at metaweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>  One solution would be to create a topic with a long name -- enter
>
>
>  it
>
>
>  exactly as it appears on the label such as "Enriched flour -
>
>
>  (wheat,
>
>
>  niacin, iron, baby powder, sawdust, DDT)".
>
>
>
>  This would answer. Anyone else have any comments or
>
>
>  thoughts on this
>
>
>  before I load the schema?
>
>
>
>          The main problem with this is you can't arrive at the products that
> use enriched flour by clicking on a property link from a single
> "enriched
>
> flour" topic. Rather, you have to do a keyword search for products
> based on matching all the various "enriched flour - (foo, bar, bat,
> baz)"
> ingredient topics with the words "enriched" and "flour".
>
>
>  That's quite
>
>
>  a loss in queriability.> >
> The schema is fine to get us started, but we're still going
>
>
>  to try to
>
>
>  put together some phylogeny pattern in place (in the near future)
> right?
>
>
>     I plan to add a phylogeny pattern before moving the schema to freebase.com, which should help queryability. It doesn't
> address the fact that topics named things like "enriched
> flour (that, that, the other thing)" are exceedingly ugly,
> however (no-one said it was called "prettybase.com", though).
>  I was going to post a revised schema to sandbox, with the
> double-phylogeny pattern suggested by Robert, but it got
> horribly munged in the process. I'll try to fix it, but it
> might not be till next week.
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> Data-modeling mailing listData-modeling at freebase.comhttp://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>
>      _______________________________________________
> Data-modeling mailing listData-modeling at freebase.comhttp://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/20090624/c819d1b6/attachment.htm