Mike,
In the MId-Level Ontology (MILO) that extends SUMO, there is the concept
of a FinancialText which ultimately is a subclass of the SUMO term Text
<http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/SKB.jsp?req=SC&name=Text&skb=SUMO>. (01)
My intial assessment is that an Invoice should be a FinancialText. You can
get the MILO at <http://ontology.teknowledge.com> (02)
Adam (03)
At 03:35 PM 7/10/2003 -0400, MDaconta@xxxxxxx wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I am working on a first draft of an invoice ontology in
>protege as an extension of (or connecting to) SUMO.
>
>This quickly gets us into the nature of an "invoice" and
>the questions we want our ontology to answer about
>invoices.
>
>My current high-level definition would be:
>"An invoice is a document which is part of a financial transaction
>between two or more parties and is a response to an order."
>
>Comments/refinements on the definition welcome. It is not meant
>to be exhaustive ... just accurate enough to correctly position the
>initial "bootstrap classes".
>
>In regards to SUMO, I have downloaded the protege version and
>included it in my protege project. While clearly an invoice follows
>the "physical" branch of the class hierarchy. I did not see anything
>in SUMO equal to or close to a Document. I probably missed it.
>Adam, is the concept of "Document" represented in SUMO?
>
>- Mike
>---------------------------------------------------
>Michael C. Daconta
>Chief Scientist, APG, McDonald Bradley, Inc.
>www.daconta.net (04)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (05)
|