[Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
Faye Harris
faye at metaweb.com
Fri Jun 26 21:24:04 UTC 2009
+1 on adding the parent-child relationship so that we'd have both
"variety of" and "derives from" properties, instead of just the former
for both purposes.
-- Faye
Jeff Prucher wrote:
> There are three examples upthread that led to the phylogeny pattern, each of
> which is a slightly different case:
>
> (variety) <--> (generalization)
> Milled corn <--> Corn
> Sodium lauryl sulfate (from coconut oil) <--> Sodium lauryl sulfate Enriched
> flour (foo, bar, bazz, fazz) <--> Enriched flour
>
> Faye's division fits this pretty well:
> Milled corn is derived from corn; SLS (from coconut) is a variety of SLS,
> and is also derived from coconut; enriched flour (etc., usw) is a variety of
> enriched flour. (Reviewing this thread, I note that Ed suggested a Processed
> Ingredient type way back at the outset.)
>
> The big question is, would we be asking for trouble by adding a parent/child
> relationship to this, in addition to the two phylogeny patterns? Or should
> we just punt it for now?
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com
>> [mailto:data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com] On Behalf Of Tom Morris
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 10:37 AM
>> To: Freebase data modeling mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
>>
>> 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_i
>>
> ngredient
>
>>
>> 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] 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>
>> <mailto:faye at metaweb.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "Faye Harris"
>> <faye at metaweb.com> <mailto:faye at metaweb.com>
>> To: "Freebase data modeling
>> mailing list"
>>
>>
>> <data-modeling at freebase.com>
>> <mailto: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> <mailto: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 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
>
>
More information about the Data-modeling
mailing list