134
results
-
The Information Service Ontology specification provides basic concepts and properties for describing different information services, e.g. Wikipedia, MusicBrainz, Freebase @en
-
A micro-ontology that defines the general concept of a service. @en
-
An event-based RDF ontology for typical status in fulfillment of a service @en
-
Vocabulary to describe fridges and freezers @en
-
This ontology provides the terminologies used for positioning systems. @en
-
In a typical (uni)temporal data model every resource's appearance (and disappearance) is being tracked. Numerous systems accomplish unitemporal tracking, either externally by e.g. using git to record the insertion or deletion of a resource, or internally by e.g. using prov:generatedAtTime and prov:invalidatedAtTime. This axis of time is known as *system time*, and none of TempO's concern because for one there is readily available support, and moreover because unitemporal tracking is used for principally true statements, i.e. those that have always been (considered) true or will always be (considered) true. TempO addresses bitemporal and tritemporal setups: Resources which are (known or believed to be) valid and efficacious for some time. A second time axis orthogonal to system time is introduced, that is a resource can be valid even though it is currently not in the system, or, conversely, can be already or still invalid by the time it enters the system. Efficacy, sometimes called decision time, is yet another concept orthogonal to validity, i.e. a resource that is no longer or not yet valid can be efficacious. The converse, a valid but inefficacious resource in the system, is *usually* not encountered but TempO does not impose restrictions on the shape of the time area. In general the necessity for tracking both validity and efficacy arises in areas where concepts are assigned a code or label that is subject to reuse following invalidation. Tracking efficacy and validity concurrently then allows for fine-grained control over how much future knowledge or how much past knowledge we tolerate in a datset. Example: -------- Czechoslovakia was founded in 1918 but became part of Germany, Hungary and Poland in 1938. It was reestablished in 1945 but split into two sovereign states in 1993. The ISO 3166 country code for Czechoslovakia used to be 'CS', assigned in 1974, published in February 1978, and invalidated with the country's split. In 2003 ISO 3166 reassigned the country code 'CS' to Serbia and Montenegro. The facts were assembled in 2018 and written down as follows: cc:CSHH a cc:ISO3166-CountryCode ; rdfs:label "CS" ; cc:refersTo "Czechoslovakia" ; prov:generatedAtTime "2018-02-29T04:00:00Z"^^xsd:dateTime . tempo:validFrom "1978-02"^^xsd:gYearMonth ; tempo:validTill "1993-01-01"^^xsd:date ; tempo:efficaciousFrom "1918"^^xsd:gYear , "1945"^^xsd:gYear ; tempo:efficaciousTill "1938"^^xsd:gYear , "2003"^^xsd:gYear . The use of the country code 'CS' in a statement from 1988 can be resolved to cc:CSHH, as of today, free from ambiguity; it was valid back then after all and we know that today. The same query in 2017 (point-in-time query) would have yielded no results because the information hadn't been in the system back then. Point-in-time queries, however, are not TempO's major concern so only as-of-today queries are assumed from now on. Following the country's split it is highly likely that news reports from, say, 1994 highlighting the then-recent past would still have used 'CS' to refer to cc:CSHH. According to the resource this is possible, a query for 'CS' in 1994 would bring up cc:CSHH as it is efficacious but marked as invalidated. On the other end of history, the use of the code 'CS' in, say, 1976 is plausible. The code was decided on but not yet formally published. A query for 'CS' as used in 1976 would bring up cc:CSHH, marked as anachronistic. Going back further, a statement from, say 1942, using the code 'CS' must clearly refer to something else. A query for 'CS' as used in 1976 would yield not yield any results. -- The ontology IRI http://purl.org/tempo/ always resolve to the latest version of TempO. Particular versionIRIs such as http://purl.org/tempo/0.1/ can be used by clients to force the import of a particular version. The goal of TempO is to allow for temporal constraints with control over how much future or past is permissible directly on the published resource, and as such, TempO does not restrict domain/ranges. @en
-
Extends owl-time ontology with support for several timelines, acting as a backbone to adress time interval/instants. Mainly designed with a multimedia use-case in mind. @en
-
The COO provides a vocabulary for exposing available configuration options for car models. It allows indicating choices that can be made as well as compatibility, dependency, and inclusion information. The ontology imports and extends the GoodRelations ontology for e-commerce @en
-
This ontology is being developed by CSIRO under the eReefs project for describing data provider nodes, web services available and datasets that are hosted by them. This ontology features a module for describing Datasets. It does not however describe geospatial, temporal, organisational or domain concepts as these are intended to be included from other ontologies via the imports statement. Other modules complementary to the DPN ontology are http://purl.org/dpn/dataset and http://purl.org/dpn/services. This version aligns DCAT and DC terms and imports DPN services. @en
-
One key use case for this ontology is to facilitate the matching of needs and innovations. @en
-
M3 lite taxonomy is designed for the FIESTA-IOT H2020 EU project. We refactor, clean and simplify the M3 ontology designed by Eurecom (Amelie Gyrard). M3 ontology lite is currently aligned with the quantity taxonomy used by several testbeds: SmartSantander (Spain), University of Surrey (United Kingdom), KETI (Korea) and Com4Innov (France). @en
-
A lightweight ontology for representing semantic trajectories and contextual elements in terms of features of interests and episodes. @en
-
An ontology for time intervals @en
-
This is an RDF/OWL representation of the GeoSciML Geologic Timescale model, which has been adapted from the model described in Cox, S.J.D, & Richard, S.M. (2005) A formal model for the geologic timescale and GSSP, compatible with geospatial information transfer standards, Geosphere, Geological Society of America 1/3, 119–137. @en
-
An OWL representation of the model for Temporal Ordinal Reference Systems defined in GeoSciML v3. @en