Difference between revisions of "Categories taxonomy alternatives"

From Open Food Facts wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Added some references)
 
(10 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
The OFF category taxonomy for products is certainly not the only around. There are many alternatives. But none of these alternatives fit the OFF needs. The ones we know of will be reviewed below.
+
The OFF categories taxonomy for products is certainly not the only around. There are many alternatives. But none of these alternatives fit the OFF needs. The ones we know of will be reviewed below.
 
Any of the alternatives should fit the following requirements:
 
Any of the alternatives should fit the following requirements:
 
* Comprensible for the end-user: anyone should be able to set the category for a product. It is similar to what a consumer encounters the the aisles of a shop;
 
* Comprensible for the end-user: anyone should be able to set the category for a product. It is similar to what a consumer encounters the the aisles of a shop;
Line 7: Line 7:
 
== Agribalyse ==
 
== Agribalyse ==
 
== Ciqual ==
 
== Ciqual ==
 +
https://ciqual.anses.fr/ is a french open database on ingredients and their components. Ingredients taxonomy is already partly linked with it.
 +
 +
== FoodOn ==
 +
[https://foodon.org/ FoodON] is only an onthology, so really it only have properties and classes. Raw products as only 8100 classes. From what I see there is no labels in other languages.
 +
 +
It is a far wider onthology from farming to food processing.
 +
 +
== Langual ==
 +
https://www.langual.org/langual_Thesaurus.asp "'''Langua aL'''imentaria" or "language of food" describe various aspects of food.
 +
 +
FoodOn is largely based on it.
 +
 +
For example it has a good onthology about food processing.
 +
 +
== Foodex ==
 +
* [[Global categories taxonomy/Foodex2|Foodex2]]
 +
** DGCCRF has told us they harmonized one of their tools on FoodEx2
 +
* [[Global categories taxonomy/List from food taxonomy owl|List from food taxonomy owl]]
 +
 
== GPC ==
 
== GPC ==
−
GPC contains a ery large categorisation of products (food and non-food). The categorisation contains a hierarchy (based in what criteria?). The granularity of the hierarchy is reasobly specific, but falls short of the OFF taxonomy. I had look at the GPC categories (https://gpc-browser.gs1.org), whether mapping to our categories would be feasible. An issue that I already see is that our tree can be more specific. Sometimes we have details not expressible in GPC. GPC uses multiple attributes instead of children. For instance the grade of an oil is an attribute, whether it is organic is an attribute and the type of oil is an attribute. This implies that some of our categories need multiple attributes AND corresponding values.
+
GPC contains a very large categorisation of products (food and non-food). The categorisation contains a hierarchy (based in what criteria?). The granularity of the hierarchy is reasobly specific, but falls short of the OFF taxonomy. I had look at the GPC categories (https://gpc-browser.gs1.org), whether mapping to our categories would be feasible. An issue that I already see is that our tree can be more specific. Sometimes we have details not expressible in GPC. GPC uses multiple attributes instead of children. For instance the grade of an oil is an attribute, whether it is organic is an attribute and the type of oil is an attribute. This implies that some of our categories need multiple attributes AND corresponding values.
−
GPC is already used by some producers who upload their data. We could use it to assign products to categories, and as additional check. As no attributes are passed by producer we can skip thise for the moment.
+
GPC is already used by some producers who upload their data. We could use it to assign products to categories, and as additional check. As no attributes are passed by producer we can skip these for the moment.
 +
=== Differences ===
 +
There are some differences when trying to map GPC to the Categories taxonomy:
 +
* Broader: the GPC is seems broader, examples:
 +
** Nuts/Seeds - Prepared/Processed (Out of Shell) (10000236)
 +
* Process-specific divisions: The GPC uses specific processes to split categories.
 +
By process type:
 +
** Shelled/Unshelled in Nuts/Seeds - Prepared/Processed (Out of Shell) (10000236)
 +
By storage type
 +
** Frozen/Perishable/Shelf stable in Fruit Juice - Ready to Drink (Perishable) (10000219)
 +
* Consumable readiness - what must the user do to eat the product.
 +
 
 +
Some of the GPC categories have been mapped to the OFF Categories taxonomy. This helps assign categories to imported products with a GPC code.
 +
== Intake24 ==
 
== WHO ==
 
== WHO ==
 
[[Category:Global_Taxonomies]]
 
[[Category:Global_Taxonomies]]
 +
[[Category:Food categories]]

Latest revision as of 15:03, 18 September 2024

The OFF categories taxonomy for products is certainly not the only around. There are many alternatives. But none of these alternatives fit the OFF needs. The ones we know of will be reviewed below. Any of the alternatives should fit the following requirements:

  • Comprensible for the end-user: anyone should be able to set the category for a product. It is similar to what a consumer encounters the the aisles of a shop;
  • Agribalyse match: in order to be able to calculate the environmental impact a mapping to the Agribalyse categories must be possible;
  • AOP match: some products have an AOP-label which corresponds to a single category. Any taxonomy must be detailed enough to accomodate this;
  • Diet hierarchy: the hierarchy of a taxonomy should be able to express many diets (vegan, etc), so that inheritance can be applied;

Agribalyse

Ciqual

https://ciqual.anses.fr/ is a french open database on ingredients and their components. Ingredients taxonomy is already partly linked with it.

FoodOn

FoodON is only an onthology, so really it only have properties and classes. Raw products as only 8100 classes. From what I see there is no labels in other languages.

It is a far wider onthology from farming to food processing.

Langual

https://www.langual.org/langual_Thesaurus.asp "Langua aLimentaria" or "language of food" describe various aspects of food.

FoodOn is largely based on it.

For example it has a good onthology about food processing.

Foodex

GPC

GPC contains a very large categorisation of products (food and non-food). The categorisation contains a hierarchy (based in what criteria?). The granularity of the hierarchy is reasobly specific, but falls short of the OFF taxonomy. I had look at the GPC categories (https://gpc-browser.gs1.org), whether mapping to our categories would be feasible. An issue that I already see is that our tree can be more specific. Sometimes we have details not expressible in GPC. GPC uses multiple attributes instead of children. For instance the grade of an oil is an attribute, whether it is organic is an attribute and the type of oil is an attribute. This implies that some of our categories need multiple attributes AND corresponding values. GPC is already used by some producers who upload their data. We could use it to assign products to categories, and as additional check. As no attributes are passed by producer we can skip these for the moment.

Differences

There are some differences when trying to map GPC to the Categories taxonomy:

  • Broader: the GPC is seems broader, examples:
    • Nuts/Seeds - Prepared/Processed (Out of Shell) (10000236)
  • Process-specific divisions: The GPC uses specific processes to split categories.

By process type:

    • Shelled/Unshelled in Nuts/Seeds - Prepared/Processed (Out of Shell) (10000236)

By storage type

    • Frozen/Perishable/Shelf stable in Fruit Juice - Ready to Drink (Perishable) (10000219)
  • Consumable readiness - what must the user do to eat the product.

Some of the GPC categories have been mapped to the OFF Categories taxonomy. This helps assign categories to imported products with a GPC code.

Intake24

WHO

Retrieved from "https://wiki.openfoodfacts.org/index.php?title=Categories_taxonomy_alternatives&oldid=24206"