Ecosyste.ms: Awesome
An open API service indexing awesome lists of open source software.
https://github.com/openthings-cc/openthings-food
Food Ontology playground
https://github.com/openthings-cc/openthings-food
Last synced: 5 days ago
JSON representation
Food Ontology playground
- Host: GitHub
- URL: https://github.com/openthings-cc/openthings-food
- Owner: openthings-cc
- Created: 2015-07-12T20:34:55.000Z (over 9 years ago)
- Default Branch: master
- Last Pushed: 2017-03-03T00:52:58.000Z (over 7 years ago)
- Last Synced: 2024-08-02T12:41:50.340Z (3 months ago)
- Homepage: http://openthings-cc.github.io/openthings-food/
- Size: 258 KB
- Stars: 7
- Watchers: 3
- Forks: 1
- Open Issues: 1
-
Metadata Files:
- Readme: README.md
Awesome Lists containing this project
- awesome-starred - openthings-cc/openthings-food - Food Ontology playground (others)
README
# openthings-food
Food mappings playground
This is an experimental repo which aims to create mappings and common ontology to describe:
* food items
* food products
* food producers/farmers
* delivery chain and actors
* food shops/hubs
* collaboration between those
the result of this effort may eventually be stored and maintained in the central repo for openthings.cc ontologies - https://github.com/openthings-cc/openthings-onto
## Similar:
* https://aims-fao.atlassian.net/wiki/display/AGV/Releases (http://aims.fao.org/vest-registry/vocabularies/agrovoc-multilingual-agricultural-thesaurus)
* https://circabc.europa.eu/faces/jsp/extension/wai/navigation/container.jsp
* http://data.lirmm.fr/ontologies/food#
* http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/food.rdf (demo)
* https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ailabitmo/food-ontology/master/food.owl (https://fruct.org/publications/abstract13/files/Kol.pdf)
* http://semanticdiet.com/data.event (some research around USDA)
## DRAFT Open Food Data Core Vocab
DRAFT - https://cdn.rawgit.com/openthings-cc/openthings-food/master/ofd-core.ttl
### Reasoning
Combining SKOS and OWL allow building less formal structure on a more formal and simple base,
combining complex relations between SKOS Concepts and at the same time
imposing constraints using OWL.
Using less formal structure will help to achieve more clear hierarchical
structure considering that we will need to relate various thesauri from different sources,
which cannot be centrally controlled.
Another advantage is that we can seamlessly relate to and reuse Agrovoc Concepts.
## Analysis
* (food1) http://data.lirmm.fr/ontologies/food#
Used in Open Food Facts(OFF) LOD. It defines basic classes for Food product and detailed ingredient properties.
It is simple and practical.. for generic food product glossary
* (food2) http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/food.rdf (demo)
It is (as it states itself) a example Ontology. It defines wide range of wines and various meals. Could be suitable for restaurants.
* (food3) http://purl.org/foodontology
As it states:
`The Food Ontology is an extension of GoodsRelations Ontology [GoodsRelations] created to represent food and food products.
Food Ontology describes food products and provides information on ingredients, additives, nutrition facts and other food-specific facts.`
*Note 'GoodsRelations' is actually GoodRelations not some other deviation.*
It has a few classes and basic properties on top of GoodRelations.
It has a set of food additives however much less than (food1).
What is nice is that it is based on GoodRelations which is by far the most adopted Ontology in the industrial world.
This strategy is also good because GoodRelations is included in most of the e-commerce related solutions now-a-days.
* Agrovoc
is a huge vocabulary describing related to agriculture.
It is based on skos and thus nicely extensible.
Its size however makes it difficult to adopt.
As for specific needs one may use just a small part of theat vocabury but miss most of the particular needs there might be.
It is very nice however as a glossary to build up the things one may need in the field of agriculture.
* DBPedia
pretty nice to link to but not sufficient to use for
specific need as in this case. DBpedia define topics not product
services or alike. Also classes hierarchy may be too strict for some
and too informal or even inaccurate for others as some individual elemts
may well be defined as classes and vice versa(this comes form the
origin of DBpedia being based on wikipedia pages and entries in
general)
* WikiData
similar to DBPedia as regards to origin however
establishing better 'class' hierarchy although in a different way but
similar to the way Agrovoc is implementing its hirachy. In WikiData
all 'things' are Items and all items has WikiData
specific property to define a subclass similarly to skos Concepts and
broader property. WikiData also has not Human friendly names rather
numbers, which I personally do not like as without using specific
tools one cannot read/write data smoothly.