-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Generalize OrderedCollection/OrderedMember model #1103
Comments
See also #424 for a more general way of defining the predicates. |
Interesting observation. I have used Membership as follows for client engagements:
If OrderedMember is to be a subclass then Membership cannot be a subclass of TemporalRelation because there is no necessary temporal element to being a member of an ordered collection. I also think that an ordered collection is important enough to exist on its own, using a providesOrderFor property. In short, it seems to work ontologically, strictly speaking. But it might not be worth doing. We'd have to create a non-temporal membership class with OrderedMembership as one variant and temporal another nondisjoint variant. Can't think of a good way to leverage the commonality you saw. |
But we don't want Alternate names for
Dan: deprecate To do: Rebecca will provide sample triples. |
@rjyounes The first part of this deck from many years ago (2012) explains the relationship between a reified relationship and a temporal relation. Best to watch the animations. This predated the class ComplexRelationship |
@uscholdm Here are the promised triple examples. I think this is in line with your slide deck. Proposed Membership Modelgist 13.0.0Ordered Collection Model
Example
Other information about the relationship, such as finishing times, can also be hung off the gist 13.1.0 Proposal: Membership Class
ExamplesOrdered CollectionsThese work the same as before, with updated classes and predicates:
What's new is that the Unordered Collections
Organization Membership
Contextualized Relationships
This leads to the proposal of a top-level class Issue #424 proposes such a class, accompanied by a predicate The proposal also includes generalized predicates My opinion: if we want to adopt the
|
Some possible reification patterns to reify :owns, :hasParticipant, :contributesTo etc. The goal of the exercise is to see if common patterns can be used. |
This is good input. |
An
OrderedMember
is an object that sits between anOrderedCollection
and its "real world" member to provide the order of that entity in the collection; given that the same object can have different positions in different collections, you cannot put the order on the thing itself. The predicateprovidesOrderFor
links theOrderedMember
to that entity, and has either a sequence number or precedence relationships.I have a use case for a temporal
Membership
relation between something and a collection. It can hold dates and potentially other information about that membership (e.g., who added it?). It strikes me that this is a generalization of ourOrderedMember
, and that if we replaceOrderedMember
withMembership
the same object can store sequence, precedence, temporal relations, and any other information about that membership.Predicate from
Membership
toCollection
:isMemberOf
. Along the lines ofoffers
either directly connecting an offer giver to the thing being offered, or an offer node that sits between them (see issue #1102). If that's not palatable (a membership is not really a member), maybeisMembershipIn
.Predicate from
Membership
to thing: I proposeisMembershipOf
.hasMember
is smoother but runs the risk of appearing to be the inverse ofisMemberOf
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: