[Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
Jeff Prucher
jeff at metaweb.com
Tue Jun 30 19:57:16 UTC 2009
And one last time:
http://www.sandbox-freebase.com/view/user/typelibrarian/default_domain/views
/cheerios_ingredients
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 26, 2009 4:38 PM
> To: 'Freebase data modeling mailing list'
> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] Products with ingredients
>
> Here's a revised schema with the derives from/derivative
> properties. Lemme know whatcha think:
>
> <http://www.sandbox-freebase.com/view/user/typelibrarian/defau
> lt_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
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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