[Data-modeling] Wind farm properties and map

[Iain Sproat]

Ed,
1) Each individual mast in a wind farm is a separate structure.  The problem
is that the structure
<http://www.freebase.com/view/architecture/structure>type currently
doesn't have a property which gives a relationship between a
group of structures and an individual structure - although, for
building's building
complex <http://www.freebase.com/view/architecture/building_complex> groups
multiple buildings <http://www.freebase.com/view/architecture/building> .We
cannot make the relationship between groups of structures and the individual
structures which are not buildings - e.g. radio
masts<http://www.freebase.com/view/en/junglinster_longwave_transmitter>
,
telescope arrays
<http://www.freebase.com/view/en/allen_telescope_array> , linked
bridges <http://www.freebase.com/view/en/great_belt_fixed_link> , coastal
defences <http://www.freebase.com/view/en/delta_works> ,
fortifications<http://www.freebase.com/view/en/maginot_line>etc. etc.
It is something I had explored in the (draft)
structure2<http://architecture2.freebase.com/type/schema/base/architecture2/structure2>type
- I'd created a "Part of larger structure or complex" property.  Let
me
know your comments on this.

2) See Offshore
windfarms<http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thanet_offshore_wind_project>
,
which clearly don't have a (meaningful) address.  I don't think address
should be used in all cases, only where explicitly given.

If we could get structure complex<->structure relationship into the existing
structure type, then I would suggest using that rather than creating a new
type.  Also spencer's power station type would be the better place for a
"power generator/turbine" property expecting a type of "power generator
model".

I'd veer away from creating a seperate type for wind turbines, as we would
then run into the problem of creating a unique type for
every<http://www.freebase.com/view/en/cloncurry_solar_power_station>
sort <http://www.oceanpowertech.com/>
of<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelamis_Wave_Energy_Converter>
clustered <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaGen>
power<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galloway_Hydro_Electric_Scheme>
station <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowy_Mountains_Scheme> (or
structure!).

Iain

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 1:19 AM, Ed Laurent <spatial.db at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm interested in using a map view to map the locations of wind farms in my
> new "Wind Energy <http://windenergy.freebase.com/>" base. There are a
> bunch of wind farms already typed as "Power station<http://infrastructure.freebase.com/view/base/infrastructure/views/power_station>"
> via spencermountain's "Infrastructure"<http://infrastructure.freebase.com/>base. There are a bunch more that can be found through Wikipedia list topics
> that typically begin with "Wind power in [location]". I have a couple
> questions and hopefully some of you have a couple good answers...
>
> 1) Is "Structure" appropriate for wind farms that are often composed of
> multiple structures (i.e., wind turbines) that might be of different designs
> and construction dates. The number, design, and construction date properties
> of turbines are of interest to me.
>
> 2) If "Structure" is appropriate, should the location of wind farms be
> added through the "Address" property of "Structure"? If so, what about wind
> farms that are located outside of cities but the US county is known, etc. I
> want to be as precise as possible with location.
>
> 3) Address is a CVT so I can't add wind farm locations to addresses using
> the list importer. Also, the address property of structure does not come up
> in the list of delegated properties. Anyone have other suggestions for this
> non-programmer?
>
> I'm leaning towards modeling a "Wind farm" type that has a "Wind farm
> location" property set as a "Wind farm location" type with "Location" as an
> included type. Other properties might include "Turbine(s)" set as a "Turbine
> construction" CVT with "Wind turbine type<http://windenergy.freebase.com/view/base/windenergy/wind_turbine_type>"
> and "Construction date" properties, etc. However, I would like to build on
> existing types and bases instead if possible.
>
> Thanks in advance for any feedback,
> -Ed
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090511/99507fd5/attachment.htm