{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/valueflows/valueflows/issues/124","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/valueflows/valueflows","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/valueflows/valueflows/issues/124/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/valueflows/valueflows/issues/124/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/valueflows/valueflows/issues/124/events","html_url":"https://github.com/valueflows/valueflows/issues/124","id":154602590,"number":124,"title":"Event types as subclasses or types or ???","user":{"login":"fosterlynn","id":3776081,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/3776081?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn","html_url":"https://github.com/fosterlynn","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fosterlynn/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":1,"created_at":"2016-05-12T23:20:35Z","updated_at":"2016-05-13T16:17:21Z","closed_at":null,"body":"I have been lately representing event types as subclasses of event.  Like [here](https://github.com/valueflows/process/issues/5#issue-115766465) and [here](https://github.com/valueflows/exchange/issues/12#issuecomment-157875673).  (Also been trying out calling an Economic Event a Value Flow, so consider those equivalent names for this discussion, and we'll work on the naming separately.)\r\n\r\nAs I knew at one point but forgot, and was reminded by @bhaugen , that works fine if you are only talking about the \"actually happened\" layer.  But then you need the same concept at both \"recipe\" and \"plan\" layers.  Event types define within the recipe what types of events will occur; and commitments on the plan layer also refer to an event type.  So now if you use subclasses, you have 3 parallel layers that basically define the subclass same structure for different things.  Ouch.\r\n\r\nIn our software, we have a class called EventType that stores all the event types and all events, commitments, and recipe parts know their event type.\r\n\r\nThere are a limited number of them, and they are well defined. \r\n\r\nIs there any other alternative?  Could we define the subclass structure on the recipe layer and just refer to those classes to define the behavior?\r\n\r\nOpinions?  Especially how would one naturally think about it is LOD / RDF land?"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/valueflows/valueflows/issues/comments/219090086","html_url":"https://github.com/valueflows/valueflows/issues/124#issuecomment-219090086","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/valueflows/valueflows/issues/124","id":219090086,"user":{"login":"elf-pavlik","id":876431,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/876431?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik","html_url":"https://github.com/elf-pavlik","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/elf-pavlik/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-05-13T16:17:21Z","updated_at":"2016-05-13T16:17:21Z","body":"> Opinions? Especially how would one naturally think about it is LOD / RDF land?\r\n\r\nI propose that\r\n1. We define all terms in vf: namespace using [OWL](https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-primer/)\r\n2. We recommend [SKOS](https://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/) for taxonomies used together with valueflows terms, for example http://aims.fao.org/standards/agrovoc\r\n\r\nThis short document talks about how OWL and SKOS can fit together https://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/skos-and-owl/master.html\r\n\r\n> Is there any other alternative? Could we define the subclass structure on the recipe layer and just refer to those classes to define the behavior?\r\n\r\nLet's work it out based on some concrete example? How about our bi-weekly calls #110 through which we create resource(s) which we believe other people will value."}}