I obviously don't understand what you are doing. (01)
> <Apple>, as an instance of schema.org/Corporation <hasNAICclassification>
> instance <334111 Electronic Computer Manufacturing> which is an instance
> of class <33411 Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing> (02)
There is nothing wrong with modeling a classification of activities as an
instance of NAICClassification.
The strange thing is modeling SOME classifications as instances and OTHER
classifications, e.g., <33411 Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing>,
as subclasses.
Is not 33411... also ontologically an instance of NAICClassification. It is a
classification, is it not?
If I assign statistical values, such as "percent of GDP" to NAIC
Classifications, how do I assign a "percent of GDP" value to 33411?
With the proposed model, I can only assign "percent of GDP" values to leaf
classifications. (03)
-Ed (04)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-
> summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bradley Shoebottom
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:17 PM
> To: Ontology Summit 2013 discussion
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: BACnet Ontology
>
> Ed,
>
> I used the NAIC myself about 4 years ago to classify a particular segment of
> the NB economy.
>
> But from an ontological perspective, organizations should not show up as a
> child of a particular activities class, but rather have an association to the
> bottommost item (instance) listed for a particular tree. I can see how the
> NAIC was used as a simple drop down taxonomy.
>
> Organizations are organizations who do an activity that yes can be classified,
> but it is improper to put them under an activity philosophically. It would be
> like me saying:
>
> Bradley Shoebottom can be classed under Fredericton (the city I live in) in a
> list of Canadian Cities organized by county, then Province then nation. I am
> not really a city, rather I am a Frederictonian which is semantically
>different.
> Frederictonian implies a person with residency.
>
> Using this excerpt from the NAIC.
>
> <Apple>, as an instance of schema.org/Corporation <hasNAICclassification>
> instance <334111 Electronic Computer Manufacturing> which is an instance
> of class <33411 Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing>
>
> <Apple> also <hasNAICclassification> instance <334210> as a child of <33421
> Telephone Apparatus Manufacturin>g. Apple is not classed as the
> broader <3342 Communications Equipment Manufacturing> because that
> would imply they make radios and TVs.
>
> 334 Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
> 3341 Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
> 33411 Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
> 334111 Electronic Computer Manufacturing
> 334112 Computer Storage Device Manufacturing
> 334118 Computer Terminal and Other Computer Peripheral Equipment
> Manufacturing
> 3342 Communications Equipment Manufacturing
> 33421 Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing
> 334210 Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing
> 33422 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
> Equipment Manufacturing
> 334220 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
> Equipment Manufacturing
> 33429 Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing
> 334290 Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing
>
> After working through this thought process, yes, I can simplify this to a
>simple
> rdf class structure with instances being companies instead of the activities,
> but my tool set still can't easily import the excel file and I either need a
>script
> or many enter 2000+ classes and arrange them. I just did a time estimate and
> it would take 20 seconds per entry or 12 hours in total.
>
> I can do this in my free time over the next 2-3 weeks.
>
> Bradley Shoebottom
> Senior Information Architect - Research and Product Development
> Phone: (506) 674-5439 | Toll-Free: (800) 363-3358
> Skype: bradley.shoebottom
> Email: bradley.shoebottom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> www.innovatia.net
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-
> summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Barkmeyer, Edward J
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:28 PM
> To: Ontology Summit 2013 discussion
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: BACnet Ontology
>
> Bradley Shoebottom wrote:
>
> > Translating the NAIC into rdf is a much bigger job than anticipated.
> >
> > IT requires that a script be written to distinguish between classes
> > and instances (instances are the bottom most number of a tree). I do
> > not have this skill.
>
> Hmm... This takes a particular view of the tree that is somewhat unexpected.
> According to the NAIC documentation, these are all Classes. The instances
> are organizations, practices, etc., that participate in those industrial
>activities.
> What am I missing?
>
> -Ed
>
>
> >
> > I initially thought I could easily pivot the table to create a tree
> > and then import, but I do not have those skills in excel.
> >
> > My tool does not easily allow the creation of classes from the
> > spreadsheet. I would be looking at a many day process to develop the
> > hierarchy and then populate it with instances.
> >
> > I am wondering if someone at Reassert is still around that helped
> > convert the US data gov info into RDF?
> >
> > The OmniClass Table 32 has a problem too because many of the Level 2
> > title use the same title as in other Level 1 categories. The OmniClass
> > code does changes. The definition remains the same. I So I could
> > create instances based on the code and when you query the label, you
> > would potentially get several and you would have to select the correct
> > parent category. Or, I create instances based on the title name and
> > include the several codes assigned to the same title with the single
> > definition. You would be able to find the proper code you want through
> > the options of the parent class. Once you let me know which you
> > prefer, it would be easy to implement as my idea would only have the
> > Level 1 titles be a class (about 10) and the remaining Level 2-4 to be
> > instances using SKOS broader/narrower to define level 2-4. I can include
> synonyms (skos altLabel) and definitions.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bradley Shoebottom
> > Senior Information Architect - Research and Product Development
> > Phone: (506) 674-5439 | Toll-Free: (800) 363-3358
> > Skype: bradley.shoebottom
> > Email: bradley.shoebottom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > www.innovatia.net
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-
> > summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of MacPherson, Deborah
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:04 AM
> > To: 'Ontology Summit 2013 discussion'
> > Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: BACnet Ontology
> >
> > Hi Paul
> >
> > A few years ago I dug into the NAICS codes and there is already a nice
> > overlap.
> >
> > The OmniClass Services table maps over to these codes, see
> > [http://www.nationalbimstandard.org/nbims-us-v2/pdf/NBIMS-
> > US2_c2.8.pdf]
> >
> > OmniClass and NAICS sit right next to each other (alphabetically!) on
> > the DoD Products and Services Report in the Business Enterprise
> > Architecture 8.1, see
> > [http://dcmo.defense.gov/products-and-services/business-enterprise-
> > architecture/8.1/delta/term.htm] however please note 10 is current,
> > see
> > [http://dcmo.defense.gov/products-and-services/business-enterprise-
> > architecture/10.0/classic/index.htm]
> >
> > The Department of Energy DOE Building Energy Performance (BEP)
> > Taxonomy also includes both OmniClass and NAICS, see
> >
> [http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/commercial/pdfs/doe_building_e
> > nergy_performance_taxonomy.pdf]
> >
> > I'll look back at the Census spreadsheet and try to mash it up with
> > some other things, thanks for the link.
> >
> > Deborah
> >
> > DEBORAH MACPHERSON
> > Specifications and Research
> >
> > Cannon Design
> > 3030 Clarendon Blvd.
> > Suite 500
> > Arlington, VA 22201
> >
> > Phone: 703.907.2353
> > Direct Dial: 2353
> >
> > dmacpherson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cannondesign.com
> > Skype debmacp
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-
> > summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pope, Paul Albert
> > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 6:21 PM
> > To: Ontology Summit 2013 discussion
> > Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: BACnet Ontology
> >
> > Deborah, et al.,
> >
> > I offer the following (perhaps cursory) info, FYI/FWIW, concerning
> > your statement "...a part name or number ... that could be mapped to a
> > generic form for broader exchange purposes" and the general interest
> > in the "facilities domain."
> >
> > North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
> > http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/
> > "It was developed jointly by the U.S. Economic Classification Policy
> > Committee (ECPC), Statistics Canada, and Mexico's Instituto Nacional
> > de Estadistica y Geografia, to allow for a high level of comparability
> > in business statistics among the North American countries."
> > I wish this taxonomy was available in OWL or other format; alas, it is
> > only(?) available as a spreadsheet:
> >
> http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/reference_files_tools/2012/2012_
> > NAICS_Structure.xls
> >
> > Concerning "Dining and Drinking Spaces", try entering the keyword "dining"
> > into the search text box in the upper left for "2012 NAICS Search".
> > The last code in the list retrieved is "722511 Full-Service
> > Restaurants". Click on that link. Not responsible for hunger pangs
> > that might result ;-)
> >
> > B/R,
> > Paul Pope, Ph.D.
> > Los Alamos National Laboratory
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [ontology-summit-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of MacPherson, Deborah
> > [dmacpherson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 3:56 PM
> > To: Ontology Summit 2013 discussion
> > Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: BACnet Ontology
> >
> > Somewhere in this discussion is a problem that is the essence of what
> > has been holding up progress in the facilities domain.
> >
> > There are ways to publish technical requirements or test for
> > conformance online for free, and pay (even substantially) to
> > participate in the working groups or have voting privileges. For example
> OGC, W3C.
> >
> > I can even see being able to own a part name or number within a larger
> > communication machine that could be mapped to a generic form for
> > broader exchange purposes. For example "13-57 13 15 Dining and Drinking
> Spaces"
> > versus "The Sand Bar and Grille"
> >
> > Depending on the domain, or need for cross disciplinary discussion,
> > many on the IP-protected side have no interest in supporting, or will
> > even actively stops progress, on a common model. There is also the
> > problem of failed common models that do not work, will not accommodate
> > different object definitions - from software to software or industry
> > model to industry model - without loss of data or functionality.
> > Bentley systems has stepped forward in this white
> > paper<http://ftp2.bentley.com/dist/collateral/docs/bentley_institute/W
> > hite _paper_IFC.pdf> on the IFC model to say actually - the emperor
> > has no clothes on. See pages 6 and 7 "Round Tripping"
> >
> > For some reason I think ontologies might be a way these IP-With-Open
> > problems might be fixed but maybe I am wrong or wishing for too much.
> >
> > DEBORAH MACPHERSON
> > Specifications and Research
> >
> > Cannon Design
> > 3030 Clarendon Blvd.
> > Suite 500
> > Arlington, VA 22201
> >
> > Phone: 703.907.2353
> > Direct Dial: 2353
> >
> >
> dmacpherson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:dmacpherson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > m>
> > Cannondesign.com
> > Skype debmacp
> >
> > From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-
> > summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Simon Spero
> > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 5:25 PM
> > To: Ontology Summit 2013 discussion
> > Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Hackathon: BACnet Ontology
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Peter R. Benson
> > <Peter.Benson@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Peter.Benson@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > Deborah, IP is a real issue. We designed the eOTD to try to resolve
> > some of these issues. In a dictionary the IP resides in the
> > representation but also in the identifiers or codes as these are always
> copyright.
> >
> > That is not entirely clear; see e.g. SOUTHCO, INC v. KANEBRIDGE
> > CORPORATION ( http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/021243pe.pdf ),
> > where part numbers were found to be not protected (but see also how
> > Alito takes care to distinguish Delta Dental )
> >
> > Simon
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> > _______
> > Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> > Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-
> > summit/
> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/
> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
> > bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
> > Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> > _______
> > Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> > Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-
> > summit/
> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/
> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
> > bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
> > Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> > _______
> > Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> > Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-
> > summit/
> > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/
> > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
> > bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
> > Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> __________________________________________________________
> _______
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-
> summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
> bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
> __________________________________________________________
> _______
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-
> summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
> bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (06)
|