4,580
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 8:
Line 8: − + + − In the same way we could search for all pureed fruits, if the the relation between [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/fruit-puree fruit puree] and [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/strawberry-puree strawberry puree] was defined.+ − − Other relations will extend the taxonomy to a thesaurus and would allow:
→Why?
If the thesaurus is extended by relations between ingredients, other benefits arise, depending on what is defined in the taxonomy.
If the thesaurus is extended by relations between ingredients, other benefits arise, depending on what is defined in the taxonomy.
* '''Inclusive search''' - The basic relation is is the isa-relation. This means that an ingredient has a parent. The rule here is: would it make sense to replace the children by the parent in the ingredients list? For instance ''strawberry puree'' and ''strawberry filling'' are still ''strawberry'', but under a different shape. So if you replace ''strawberry puree'' with ''strawberry'' in the ingredient list, it is still a valid ingredient list. Probably ''strawberry flavour'' is NOT a kind of ''strawberry'', so the relation should not be set in the taxonomy. The inclusive search means that a search for the parent ''strawberry'' will also show the children ''strawberry puree'', etc.
* '''Inclusive source search''' - The basic relation is is the isa-relation. This means that an ingredient has a parent. The rule here is: would it make sense to replace the children by the parent in the ingredients list? For instance ''strawberry puree'' and ''strawberry filling'' are still ''strawberry'', but under a different shape. So if you replace ''strawberry puree'' with ''strawberry'' in the ingredient list, it is still a valid ingredient list. Probably ''strawberry flavour'' is NOT a kind of ''strawberry'', so the relation should not be set in the taxonomy. The '''inclusive search''' means that a search for the parent ''strawberry'' will also show the children ''strawberry puree'', etc. The '''source search''' means the the origin of the ingredient, i.e. strawberry , apple, cinnamon, soy, etc. What should be included in an inclusive source search is subjective, it just depends what you want to show. (I want another word for source).
* '''Inclusive condition search''' - in a similar way we could search for the condition of a source ingredient, for instance pureed, juiced, dried, reconditioned, etc. So if we would like to search for all pureed fruits, the relation between [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/fruit-puree fruit puree] and [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/strawberry-puree strawberry puree] should be defined in the taxonomy. This is also a subjective choice
The inclusive search examples, is how OFF uses the taxonomy at the moment. The problem is that the logic between the ingredients, is now tie to the application search. This could be generalised and other relations could extend the taxonomy and would allow:
* '''Hidden ingredients''' - an ingredient might contain hidden ingredients, the ontology might reveal these. For example [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/butter butter] contains [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/butterfat butterfat].
* '''Hidden ingredients''' - an ingredient might contain hidden ingredients, the ontology might reveal these. For example [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/butter butter] contains [https://world.openfoodfacts.org/ingredient/butterfat butterfat].
* '''Combined ingredients''' - an ingredient might appear as a single ingredient. In reality however
* '''Combined ingredients''' - an ingredient might appear as a single ingredient. In reality however