[Buildingdata] Re: Modelling facilities and equipment (for the EPSRC equipment sharing initiative)

[Christopher Gutteridge]

I've updated the

http://openorg.ecs.soton.ac.uk/wiki/Facilities_and_Equipment

Page to use their classes.

Their relations have a start and end date. For our things it seems like 
it would be more useful to say "asserted as true in 2011" or something 
easy to report from a database.



On 05/03/12 12:58, Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
> I'd not realised that had a whole section about Equipment, Facilities
> and Services. We certainly shouldn't reinvent that wheel again, given
> this looks pretty solid. I'm not sure about the dated relationships
> between components-- but it is an elegant solution... In fact I'm
> tempted to suggest we might want to consider it for the buildings DB
> over "rooms:occupies" as it handles the issues of changes-of-truth much
> better, but hardly hurts consumption. I can't tell if you're supposed to
> have URI for each relationship between 2 things, or you could just list
> a single dated relation between a building and it's related facilities?
>
> We're still early enough in laying out patterns that we can wiggle lots
> without cost.
>
> Our draft pattern is on the wiki here, by the way:
> http://openorg.ecs.soton.ac.uk/wiki/Facilities_and_Equipment
>
>
> On 05/03/12 11:53, Alexander Dutton wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> You may be aware of an EPSRC-sponsored initiative between Cambridge,
>> Imperial, Oxford, Southampton and UCL to share information about
>> research facilities and equipment to encourage greater sharing of
>> resources. By the looks of it there's no public website, and our website
>> is limited to the Oxford network.
>>
>> David Shotton last week suggested that CERIF
>> (http://www.eurocris.org/Index.php?page=CERIFreleases&t=1) might be
>> something to look at for modelling some aspects of this. From an initial
>> exploration, CERIF 1.3 onwards contains XML elements for describing
>> facilities, equipment and services, and there is an RDF vocabulary
>> (http://spi-fm.uca.es/neologism/cerif/) for such terms, all subclassing
>> cerif:InfrastructureEntity. The ontology as a whole does a lot of
>> wheel-reinvention, but there may be some useful terms in there.
>>
>> Following on from this, I think it does make sense to consider using
>> goodrelations for advertising availability, and maybe coming up with
>> some common terms for classes of eligible customers.
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Buildingdata mailing list
>> Buildingdata at ecs.soton.ac.uk
>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/buildingdata

-- 
Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248

/ Lead Developer, EPrints Project, http://eprints.org/
/ Web Projects Manager, ECS, University of Southampton, http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/
/ Webmaster, Web Science Trust, http://www.webscience.org/