So it is clear, instance_of, when translated to OWL, has generally been written as the predicate rdf:type. There is no specific instance_of relation defined as a property in OWL versions.
There is still a difference between rdf:type and instance_of, which is that it is ternary temporally indexed relation as defined in BFO *Alan* instance_of* Researcher* in *2014*. Unfortunately there is no clear way to translate this into OWL. Fixing that is among the work being done for BFO2 On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:25 PM, David Cuenca <dacu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with using "instance of" as RO prescribes, also because it would > clarify its use. > > Regarding #2, what is the difference between stating "<ethanol> instance > of <type of chemical compound>" or "<ethanol> type of <chemical compound>? > We have some antecedents using ad-hoc typing properties, that perhaps could > be merged into a more generic property: > https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=p%3Atype&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go > > > Cheers, > Micru > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 3:51 AM, Emw <emw.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I have removed the statement *"instance of* chemical compound" from >> ethanol (Q153) [1]. >> >> A few proposals have been made in this thread about how -- or whether -- >> to use *instance of* (i.e. rdf:type, P31) to classify 'ethanol' and >> other chemical compounds, but there seems to be consensus that "*instance >> of* chemical compound" is not the way to do it. >> >> Summary of proposals: >> >> 1. *Do not use instance of for chemical compounds*. Such statements >> make Wikidata incompatible with many major scientific ontologies, like >> ChEBI, Gene Ontology and Disease Ontology, which use *instance of* as >> defined in the Relation Ontology (RO) [2]. Note that RO defines instances >> as particular things that have a unique location in space and time, >> whereas >> classes are universal, general entities which have particular instances. >> Instances and classes are thus disjoint, so RO-based ontologies cannot >> have >> entities that have both *instance of* (rdf:type, P31) and *subclass >> of* (rdfs:subClassOf, P279) statements as is possible in OWL 2 DL via >> punning. >> >> 2. *Use statements like "instance of type of chemical compound" for >> chemical compounds*. Doing so makes it easier to generate lists of >> chemical compounds, and is valid in OWL 2 DL -- it is metamodeling via >> punning. >> >> Let's build consensus for how (or whether) we want to use *instance of* >> for chemical compounds before any mass edits to remove or replace the 14969 >> other "*instance of* chemical compound" claims [3] or adding statements >> like "*instance of *type of chemical compound" to ethanol. >> >> Micru has a different proposal for how to model items, which incidentally >> does not represent "ethanol" as an instance [4]. However, that proposal is >> clearly a more radical vision for Wikidata, and probably warrants a >> separate thread for discussion. >> >> Eric >> >> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Emw >> [1] Removal of "*instance of* chemical compound" from ethanol: >> https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q153&diff=162563849&oldid=162327014 >> [2] Barry Smith et al. (2005). *Relations in Biomedical Ontologies*. >> http://genomebiology.com/2005/6/5/r46 >> [3] All "*instance of* chemical compound" claims on Wikidata. >> http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/autolist.html?q=claim[31:11173] >> [4] "'ethanol' is no longer an instance, but a class". >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikidata-l/2014-October/004691.html >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata-l mailing list >> Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l >> >> > > > -- > Etiamsi omnes, ego non >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
