I must contend. The common sense meaning of 'track' is the physical beam
over which the train moves, although wikipedians confuse tracks with
routes and lines. Also, 'line' does not mean 'company' except in a
metonymic context., as using 'airline' to mean 'airline company'. The
native English speaking people in the list can attest this. In German,
this is a 'Fluggesellschaft', in Portuguese a 'companhia aérea', with no
reference to lines in any way. In contrast, a RailwayLine in German is
Eisenbahnlinie, and in Portuguese 'linha férrea', both clearly lines or
routes.
You should not say "American Airlines" (note the plural form) is a single
airline, it is a single airline company. The fact that English speaking
people abuse of metonyms is just a fact that you have to live with, It
just makes modeling a bit more troublesome for them. Note that AA
operates several lines , such as the GIG-JFK line or route, but is not
itself a air line . Your misconception is not a model problem, it is a
English problem.
So to improve your sugestion and to avoid the ambiguity of 'line' one
would rather use
1. RailwayRoute (still as a subclass of RouteOfTransportation, since
most infobox properties derive from this class)
2. RailwayCompany (a subclass of Company, a completely independent class,
RailwayRoute SHOULD NOT be a subclass of Company)
RailwayRoute (currently RailwayLine) classifies resources such as
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Line_21,_Shanghai_Metro
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Wolkramshausen–Erfurt_railway
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Fatuha–Tilaiya_line
which are clearly NOT Companies in any way. The new class RailwayCompany
may be used to classify the objects pointed by the property
dbo:operatedBy, which are currently Companies and sometimes (I think this
is a mistake) a PublicTransportationSystem.
For example, dbr:Assensbanen (a railway line) is operated by dbr:
DSB_(railway_company) which as the page name suggests is a company, not
a line.
Please review the pages classified under RailwayLine and you will realize
they are NOT about the companies that operate the lines.
However, in order to minimize changes, I would NOT rename RailwayLine,
since its meaning is rather clear in English and crystal clear in other
languages -- only the descriptions are wrong, since they are not services
offered by the companies but routes operated by the companies. I think the
class should stay.
Since there are a lot of railway companies, even more than airline
companies, they should get their own class and mappings.
Unfortunately, DBO classes do not have a fully consistent naming. Renaming
Airline to AirlineCompany would help and be more consistent with
BusCompany.
There are worse things, such as RecordLabel being a Company, which is
clearly and completely wrong from a real-world-medelling point of view. A
recording company can own several labels. For exemplo, both
dbr:Eagle_Records and dbr:Capitol_Records are labels owned by the same
company, dbc:Universal_Music_Group. But wikipedians mix it all up, and the
function of DBpedia is not to fix this, it merely reproduces the mixup.
DBO is thus far from perfect. If you want better classes and a more
meaningful and logical consistent ontology, you should try Yago or such.
Closely modeling a specific domain is already pretty hard; modeling an
all-encompassing domain like Wikipedia is pretty much impossible. We have
to live with such gross aproximations if we are to get something useful
done.
Cheers.
=============================================
Marcelo Jaccoud Amaral
PETROBRAS
Tecnologia da Informação e Comunicações - Arquitetura (TIC/ARQSERV/ARQTIC)
=============================================
dum loquimur, fugetir invida aetas: carpe diem, quam minimum credula
postero.
-- Horatius
De: Joakim Soderberg <joakim.soderb...@blippar.com>
Para: jacc...@petrobras.com.br
Cc: "DBpedia Discussion (ML)"
<dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
Data: 2017-01-04 20:30
Assunto: Re: [DBpedia-discussion] DBO RailwayLine definition
How about:
1. change RailwayLine to RailwayTrack ( under TransportInfrastructure) and
update the description
2. Add RailwayLine under Company
On Jan 4, 2017, at 5:22 AM, jacc...@petrobras.com.br wrote:
A "railway line" is a overloaded term, which can mean, acording to the
wikipedia Glossary_of_rail_transport_terms#Railway_line:
A railway route connecting two or more places or other railway routes[184]
A railway route constructed by an organization, usually one formed for
that purpose[184][185][186]
A railway route which has been given the line name officially (e.g. by
engineers line references in the UK)[187]
A set of railway routes which are bundled for publicity purposes (e.g. a
UK train operating company)[188][189]
A set of railway routes without official standing, on which railfanshave
bestowed a title[citation needed]
Unfortunately, the same glossary does not define a railway route.
However, we are talking about ontological concepts, not terms. These would
map to 5 different concepts, some of them with defined classes:
1. the physical track made by rails over which trains runs
(dbo:RouteOfTransportation)
2. the geographical path between two places that the tracks define
(no class apparently matches this)
3. the route between two points offered as a service by a company
(also no class)
4. the company that operates a set of routes (dbo:Company, an
dbo:Organisation)
5. the system composed of tracks, trains, organizations and personnel
required for its working (maybe dbo:PublicTransitSystem, which is a
different type of dbo:Organisation)
6. the service or action provided by such a system (dbo:PublicService
?)
There are two different definitions in the class annotations. The English
annotation states:
A railway line is a transport service by trains that pull passengers or
freight provided by an organization. Not to be mistaken for railway track,
which is the structure consisting of the rails. Wikipedia do not clearly
differentiate between both, so there is one infobox describing tracks and
lines.
This is clearly a very bad definition, because it states it should not be
mistaken for the tracks (1) but then says the infobox refers to both
tracks and lines.
The Greek comment is a simple translation of the English definition. The
German definition is somewhat different:
Eine Eisenbahnlinie im Verkehrswesen ist die regelmäßige Bedienung einer
bestimmten Eisenbahnstrecke durch öffentliche Verkehrsmittel.
Note that the German definition says the line is the operation of the
system (Bedienung) and not a service (Dienst), which I find very strange,
since it does not correspond to none of the the usual meanings of a
railway line (or a airline or a bus line).
Note that Airline is clearly defined as a company, but we have a
BusCompany instead of a BusLine. RailwayLine clearly does not fit here, it
has nothing to do with none of the definitions, so I think Joakim's
sugestion of moving it to Company is misguided. For completeness though,
we should have RailwayCompany, and to improve consistency, Airline should
be AirlineCompany.
So, what is really an RailwayLine? A system (4), a service (5) or an
infrastructure (1)?
If we stick to the infobox, all of them. There are properties which are
clearly related to the service (such as toll), others to the
infrastructure (trackLength), and others to the system (numberOfStations).
Ideally, in a well structured ontology, such concepts would be completely
separated, because services and tracks ans systems are completly different
animals. Just for start, (1) is a physical endurant (concrete identifiable
thing), (4) is a fiat object (a group of things define by man) and (5) is
a perdurant (a transient process that occurs in time).
Note also that PublicTransitSystem is defined as a subclass of
Organisation, which makes it very, very, confusing. A system should
include the physical means, but an Organisation does not allow for that.
This has class has similar definition problems.
Also, PublicService dodes not seem to be a service, but a public office,
such as a ministry. Definitions are very inexact.
We have to keep in mind that DBO is not a strict, philosophical consistent
ontology, it is full of such inconsistencies. It would be impossible to
choose a strict base ontology such as DOLCE or UFO and fit DBO into it. We
would go crazy trying to do so. DBO is aimed at representing what we have
in Wikipedia, which is a mess. For exemple, there is no dbo:Service class
with common service properties such as provider, toll etc. so these
properties are all spread (and repeated) in other classes.
So, in order to reduce the inconsistencies without breaking everything, I
propose:
a) Create a class RailwayCompany. It should not be defined as a subclass
of PublicTransitSystem, but as sibling to BusCompany.
b) Keep RailwayLine subclass of RouteOfTransportation, because we have no
better class to fit it in.
c) Adjust mapping to differentiate between the company and the routes it
operates.
Cheers.
=============================================
Marcelo Jaccoud Amaral
PETROBRAS
Tecnologia da Informação e Comunicações - Arquitetura (TIC/ARQSERV/ARQTIC)
<Mail Attachment.jpeg>
=============================================
De: Joakim Soderberg <joakim.soderb...@blippar.com>
Para: "DBpedia Discussion (ML)" <
dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
Data: 2017-01-03 19:49
Assunto: [DBpedia-discussion] DBO RailwayLine definition
Hi,
Isn’t the definition of class dbo:RailwayLine wrong.
Currently it is a subclass of Infrastructure/RouteOfTransportation, but
according the definition: "A railway line is a transport service by trains
that pull passengers or freight provided by an organization”, it should
be under Organisation/Company.
/Joakim
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
DBpedia-discussion mailing list
DBpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
"O emitente desta mensagem é responsável por seu conteúdo e endereçamento.
Cabe ao destinatário cuidar quanto ao tratamento adequado. Sem a devida
autorização, a divulgação, a reprodução, a distribuição ou qualquer outra
ação em desconformidade com as normas internas do Sistema Petrobras são
proibidas e passíveis de sanção disciplinar, cível e criminal."
"The sender of this message is responsible for its content and addressing.
The receiver shall take proper care of it. Without due authorization, the
publication, reproduction, distribution or the performance of any other
action not conforming to Petrobras System internal policies and procedures
is forbidden and liable to disciplinary, civil or criminal sanctions."
"El emisor de este mensaje es responsable por su contenido y
direccionamiento. Cabe al destinatario darle el tratamiento adecuado. Sin
la debida autorización, su divulgación, reproducción, distribución o
cualquier otra acción no conforme a las normas internas del Sistema
Petrobras están prohibidas y serán pasibles de sanción disciplinaria,
civil y penal."
"O emitente desta mensagem é responsável por seu conteúdo e endereçamento. Cabe
ao destinatário cuidar quanto ao tratamento adequado. Sem a devida autorização,
a divulgação, a reprodução, a distribuição ou qualquer outra ação em
desconformidade com as normas internas do Sistema Petrobras são proibidas e
passíveis de sanção disciplinar, cível e criminal."
"The sender of this message is responsible for its content and addressing. The
receiver shall take proper care of it. Without due authorization, the
publication, reproduction, distribution or the performance of any other action
not conforming to Petrobras System internal policies and procedures is
forbidden and liable to disciplinary, civil or criminal sanctions."
"El emisor de este mensaje es responsable por su contenido y direccionamiento.
Cabe al destinatario darle el tratamiento adecuado. Sin la debida autorización,
su divulgación, reproducción, distribución o cualquier otra acción no conforme
a las normas internas del Sistema Petrobras están prohibidas y serán pasibles
de sanción disciplinaria, civil y penal."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
DBpedia-discussion mailing list
DBpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
