[Freebase-discuss] Broader/narrower for food ingredients

[Jeff Prucher]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ah, I see.  I was thinking *generally broader or narrower*.  Not with
> an always expected type of another food_ingredient.  Does it expect
> another "ingredient" ? or just "food" ?

It expects an ingredient. This is an ingredient-specific pattern.

> broader for "bell pepper" would be "pepper" ?  I think it would be a
> generally would be.  But your saying we probably DO NOT want to
> broaden to begin to hit into "plant" categories, but stop at the idea
> of "food" or "ingredient". Right?

Correct. Connecting ingredients to their source organisms is also
something that would be valuable, but is not in the scope of this
proposal.

> So, you are asking for another ingredient when we ask for "broader
> category". Right ?
>
> Because the property term or phrase I am not seeing is "broader
> ingredient" instead of "broader category" or even "broader food".

Got it. I think you're right -- "broader category" is fairly
ambiguous. So which would be better: "Broader ingredient"?  "More
general ingredient" and "More specific ingredient"?  Others?

> Hear my confusion now ?
>
> For example:
>
> "In Northern Mexico and in American Tex-Mex cuisine, refried beans are
> usually prepared with pinto beans, but many other varieties of bean
> are used in other parts of Mexico, such as black or red beans."
>
> Which way does that one sway ?  Broader category "ingredient"
> generally seems to be just "beans", but it also could be broader with
> all three types of beans like "pinto beans", "black beans", or "red
> beans".  Correct ?

I'd go with the more general case here; since virtually any type of
bean could be refried. It seems like in this case being
overly-specific would make the data less usable.

Jeff

> Hey, you asked for thoughts, and I'm giving you your money's worth ;)
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Jeff Prucher <jprucher at google.com> wrote:
>> Well, not everything needs or has a broader/narrower category. If it
>> hurts to think about it, you probably don't need a broader/narrower
>> category. Although "curry paste" (/en/curry_paste) seems like the
>> obvious broader category for "Thai green curry paste".
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This will totally rock once the narrower discoveries are applied to
>>> Google's Recipe search already in place now. ;+)
>>>
>>> Just wondering how the hell to broaden or narrow for "Ketchup" and
>>> "Thai green curry paste" that I just added.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Jeff Prucher <jprucher at google.com> wrote:
>>>> We need a way to categorize recipe ingredients (i.e. /food/ingredient)
>>>> as being broader or narrower (or more or less specific) than each
>>>> other. For example, "red pepper" is narrower than "bell pepper", or
>>>> "light brown sugar" is narrower than "brown sugar" is narrower than
>>>> "sugar". A fair amount of data of this sort has been entered using the
>>>> "SKOS concept" type, which is causing problems (discussed elsewhere on
>>>> this list), so we need someplace else to put the data.
>>>>
>>>> The SKOS broader/narrower pattern is very loose, and I think
>>>> replicating it on the Ingredient type would work well. I've put
>>>> together a type here, to try out the properties:
>>>> http://www.freebase.com/view/user/jeff/default_domain/food_ingredient
>>>>
>>>> The intention is that this is for culinary, rather than biological,
>>>> relationships, and would be used, for example, to help find
>>>> nutritional information or identify possible substitutions.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the Freebase-discuss mailing list.
>>>> To post a message to the list: Freebase-discuss at freebase.com
>>>> To unsubscribe, view archives, etc: http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/freebase-discuss
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -Thad
>>> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the Freebase-discuss mailing list.
>>> To post a message to the list: Freebase-discuss at freebase.com
>>> To unsubscribe, view archives, etc: http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/freebase-discuss
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the Freebase-discuss mailing list.
>> To post a message to the list: Freebase-discuss at freebase.com
>> To unsubscribe, view archives, etc: http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/freebase-discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -Thad
> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the Freebase-discuss mailing list.
> To post a message to the list: Freebase-discuss at freebase.com
> To unsubscribe, view archives, etc: http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/freebase-discuss
>