[Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
Jeff Prucher
jeff at metaweb.com
Fri Jun 26 23:37:48 UTC 2009
Here's a revised schema with the derives from/derivative properties. Lemme
know whatcha think:
<http://www.sandbox-freebase.com/view/user/typelibrarian/default_domain/view
s/cranberry_almond_crunch_ingredients>
Jeff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com
> [mailto:data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com] On Behalf Of Faye Harris
> Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 2:24 PM
> To: Freebase data modeling mailing list
> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
>
> +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
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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