Thanks Matthew, I have never been clear on the relationships between 15926,
EXPRESS, STEP and the ways these can work together. Is there an overview on
this somewhere to help the building information community understand more about
the standards governing larger systems that come into buildings, for example
utilities? (01)
Regards, (02)
Deborah (03)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Matthew West
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 12:46 PM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] International Alliance for Interoperability (04)
Dear Deborah, (05)
Just to tie this up for people not in the know... (06)
> The International Alliance for Interoperability has changed its name
> to building SMART international http://www.buildingsmart.com/. Another
> relevant ISO standard to add to your list is 16739 Industry Foundation
> Classes (IFC). Here is part of a diagram for referencing classes in
> IFC
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/BSP/FPML/IFC2xObjectDiagram%23141B04
> B .jpg. Please also see the Model View Definitions at http://www.blis-
> project.org/IAI-MVD/ for IFC data exchange, ideally supported by the
> IFD.
>
> There are a number of chasms and gaps in the connections from the
> IFCs, to the IFD, to EPISTLE and related standards. (07)
[MW] The EPISTLE work is standardised as ISO 15926 of course. (08)
Regards (09)
Matthew West
Information Junction
Tel: +44 560 302 3685
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (010)
This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in England and
Wales No. 6632177.
Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE. (011)
> Today, even though the
> files are huge and hard to push around or share real time, most
> building models are "at the gross level, there is very little
> difference between an ontology and a terminology". Nevertheless,
> accurate models at this level can be useful to public services such as
> fire departments to exchange basic information about building
> configurations and types because simple accuracy is all that is needed.
> There is still much work to do on consistency and flexible terminology
> for the simple level to work. As more data can be reported out from
> buildings to monitor performance such as energy efficiency on regional
> levels, it will be more and more important to reach consensus on a
> solid working ontology for the "detailed levels where all the complex
> reasoning and computations are carried out." Right now there is not
> one continuous chain of communication
> to do this.
>
> Building Information Models (BIM) and Geographic Information Systems
> (GIS) are converging at a rapid pace, the need for simple exchanges
> can get lost in the quest for the complex levels to work together.
> What I have been wishing for is someone really good in complex
> reasoning standards to take this 50,000 foot up hierarchy developed by
> the Open Geospatial Consortium and National Building Information
> Modeling Standard
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/BSP/ConferenceCall_2008-11-
> 28/NBIMHierarchicalRelationship.jpg and write it out in OWL or other
> preferred ontology language. I would like to develop a few scenarios
> and try working with this all the way through from top to bottom, from
> a component, node or room to the place of this thing in the whole
> world.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Deborah MacPherson
> Specifications and Research, Cannon Design Projects Director,
> Accuracy&Aesthetics
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:46 AM
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: [ontolog-forum] International Alliance for Interoperability
>
> The subject line above states the name of an organization that is
> devoted to interoperability. That particular organization has its
> roots in the building industry, but every branch of science,
> engineering, and business has similar organizations.
>
> As an example of what they do, see their description of IFD:
>
> International Framework for Dictionaries (ISO 12006-3) is a
> library with terminology and ontologies assisting in identifying
> the type of information being exchanged. It is developed with
> the purpose of adding value to the IFCs and is language and
> culture independent.
>
> The International Framework for Dictionaries (IFD) (ISO 12006-3)
> standard is developed by ISO TC 59/SC 13/WG 6. Many of the members
> of the work group are also members of International Construction
> Information Society (ICIS ). The IFD standard has many similarities
> with the EPISTLE standard for the Oil and Gas industry.
>
> While the IFC standard describes objects, how they are connected,
> and how the information should be exanged and stored, the IFD
> standard uniquely describe what the objects are, and what
> properties, units and values they can have. IFD provides the
> dictionary, the definitions of concepts, the relationships between
> them and the common understanding necessary for the communication
> to flow smoothly.
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.iai-tech.org/products/related-
> specifications/ifd_specification
>
> That web page has a link to "IFD in a Nutshell", which gives examples:
>
> http://dev.ifd-library.org/index.php/Ifd:IFD_in_a_Nutshell
>
> The following diagram describes 'door':
>
> http://dev.ifd-library.org/images/thumb/8/8d/Ontology.png/450px-
> Ontology.png
>
> That diagram uses relations with the following names: 'is a type of',
> 'is a part of', 'consists of', 'can be', and 'relates to'.
>
> Those five relations by themselves (including the catchall 'relates
> to') provide a gross level classification, but they aren't sufficient
> for detailed reasoning. However, they are very important for
> searching, classifying, and natural language analysis and
> disambiguation.
>
> That level of detail is certainly insufficient for designing doors
> that can be interchanged among different buildings. Those details,
> however, have always been stated in very low-level specifications,
> such as traditional blueprints or CAD/CAM programs.
>
> Those two levels of specification are typical of every field:
>
> 1. A gross-level classification with very few relation types and
> few if any axioms.
>
> 2. A precise, extremely detailed specification that can support
> extended reasoning, computation, construction, and assembly.
>
> At the gross level, there is very little difference between an
> ontology and a terminology. The detailed levels are where all the
> complex reasoning and computations are carried out.
>
> If our ontology proposals are to be useful in practice, it is
> essential for us to recognize those two levels and incorporate them in
> any proposed standards or guidelines.
>
> John Sowa
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
> bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J To Post:
> mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (012)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (013)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (014)
|
