Suggested changes to MO
Alexandre Passant
I've got some small suggestions re. the current MO design.
Sorry if it was already raised / close.
* mo:instrument / mo:label
- These properties link respectively a Performance / ReleaseEvent to an Instrument / Label.
However, I'd like to use them to link artists to their instrument(s) / label(s) - as with their genre(s).
Could the range be changed for this ?
* Modelling influences
- While the ontology provides mo:collaborated_with, it would be nice to model influences in a similar way, with an mo:influenced / influenced_by property.
Opinions ?
Thanks,
Alex.
--
Dr. Alexandre Passant
Digital Enterprise Research Institute
National University of Ireland, Galway
:me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> .
Kurt J
<alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've got some small suggestions re. the current MO design.
> Sorry if it was already raised / close.
>
> * mo:instrument / mo:label
>
> - These properties link respectively a Performance / ReleaseEvent to an Instrument / Label.
> However, I'd like to use them to link artists to their instrument(s) / label(s) - as with their genre(s).
> Could the range be changed for this ?
that all sounds reasonable to me.
> * Modelling influences
>
> - While the ontology provides mo:collaborated_with, it would be nice to model influences in a similar way, with an mo:influenced / influenced_by property.
> Opinions ?
Note that MuSim provides some facility for this but adds a layer of
reification to describe the influence. See
http://grasstunes.net/ontology/similarity/0.2/musim.html#Influence
However, I know reification of this type is not for everyone and not
for every application. I'm not opposed to a mo:influenced /
influenced_by property paradigm but I'm not sure it belongs in the mo
namespace.
-kurt j
> Thanks,
>
> Alex.
>
> --
> Dr. Alexandre Passant
> Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> National University of Ireland, Galway
> :me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Music Ontology Specification Group" group.
> To post to this group, send email to music-ontology-sp...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to music-ontology-specific...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/music-ontology-specification-group?hl=en.
>
>
Alexandre Passant
On 1 Oct 2010, at 17:20, Kurt J wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Alexandre Passant
> <alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've got some small suggestions re. the current MO design.
>> Sorry if it was already raised / close.
>>
>> * mo:instrument / mo:label
>>
>> - These properties link respectively a Performance / ReleaseEvent to an Instrument / Label.
>> However, I'd like to use them to link artists to their instrument(s) / label(s) - as with their genre(s).
>> Could the range be changed for this ?
>
> that all sounds reasonable to me.
>
cool :)
>> * Modelling influences
>>
>> - While the ontology provides mo:collaborated_with, it would be nice to model influences in a similar way, with an mo:influenced / influenced_by property.
>> Opinions ?
>
> Note that MuSim provides some facility for this but adds a layer of
> reification to describe the influence. See
> http://grasstunes.net/ontology/similarity/0.2/musim.html#Influence
>
> However, I know reification of this type is not for everyone and not
> for every application.
Yes, I thought about reifying it, but I'm also looking for a direct property.
> I'm not opposed to a mo:influenced /
> influenced_by property paradigm but I'm not sure it belongs in the mo
> namespace.
Good point - that made me think of looking at the RELATIONSHIP vocabulary and there's indeed something here that can be used !
http://purl.org/vocab/relationship/influencedBy
Alex.
Kurt J
<alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
>
> On 1 Oct 2010, at 17:20, Kurt J wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Alexandre Passant
>> <alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've got some small suggestions re. the current MO design.
>>> Sorry if it was already raised / close.
>>>
>>> * mo:instrument / mo:label
>>>
>>> - These properties link respectively a Performance / ReleaseEvent to an Instrument / Label.
>>> However, I'd like to use them to link artists to their instrument(s) / label(s) - as with their genre(s).
>>> Could the range be changed for this ?
>>
>> that all sounds reasonable to me.
>>
>
> cool :)
I went ahead and added this to the TODO wiki page. If it turns out
that was premature, we can just remove it:
http://wiki.musicontology.com/index.php/Todo_list#Music_Ontology
Note I've also added my mo:duration_ms idea since nobody responded and
i think it makes loads of sense.
-kurt j
Yves Raimond
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Alexandre Passant
<alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've got some small suggestions re. the current MO design.
> Sorry if it was already raised / close.
>
> * mo:instrument / mo:label
>
> - These properties link respectively a Performance / ReleaseEvent to an Instrument / Label.
> However, I'd like to use them to link artists to their instrument(s) / label(s) - as with their genre(s).
> Could the range be changed for this ?
>
There is a mo:primary_instrument which should enable you to link an
artist to an instrument:
http://musicontology.com/#term_primary_instrument
For mo:label, that sounds good.
> * Modelling influences
>
> - While the ontology provides mo:collaborated_with, it would be nice to model influences in a similar way, with an mo:influenced / influenced_by property.
> Opinions ?
Kurt's MuSim or the relationships vocabulary?
Cheers,
y
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex.
>
> --
> Dr. Alexandre Passant
> Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> National University of Ireland, Galway
> :me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
Alexandre Passant
On 4 Oct 2010, at 09:02, Yves Raimond wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Alexandre Passant
> <alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've got some small suggestions re. the current MO design.
>> Sorry if it was already raised / close.
>>
>> * mo:instrument / mo:label
>>
>> - These properties link respectively a Performance / ReleaseEvent to an Instrument / Label.
>> However, I'd like to use them to link artists to their instrument(s) / label(s) - as with their genre(s).
>> Could the range be changed for this ?
>>
>
> There is a mo:primary_instrument which should enable you to link an
> artist to an instrument:
> http://musicontology.com/#term_primary_instrument
The current domain is mo:Membership, so I cannot link *directly* an artist here
> For mo:label, that sounds good.
Great !
>
>> * Modelling influences
>>
>> - While the ontology provides mo:collaborated_with, it would be nice to model influences in a similar way, with an mo:influenced / influenced_by property.
>> Opinions ?
>
> Kurt's MuSim or the relationships vocabulary?
Yes, I spotted that after the email, and Kurt mention his MuSim vocab - so that's ok for that one I guess
Thanks,
Alex.
Yves Raimond
<alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 4 Oct 2010, at 09:02, Yves Raimond wrote:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Alexandre Passant
>> <alexandr...@deri.org> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've got some small suggestions re. the current MO design.
>>> Sorry if it was already raised / close.
>>>
>>> * mo:instrument / mo:label
>>>
>>> - These properties link respectively a Performance / ReleaseEvent to an Instrument / Label.
>>> However, I'd like to use them to link artists to their instrument(s) / label(s) - as with their genre(s).
>>> Could the range be changed for this ?
>>>
>>
>> There is a mo:primary_instrument which should enable you to link an
>> artist to an instrument:
>> http://musicontology.com/#term_primary_instrument
>
> The current domain is mo:Membership, so I cannot link *directly* an artist here
>
OK - so you want to link from an artist to an instrument outside of
any particular membership? It might be quite brittle in lots of cases
though. We'd have to see what is the relationships between all those
'instrument' properties as well, as it would give three ways of
associating someone with an instrument:
* At the performance level (someone is playing that instrument at this event)
* At the membership level (X played Y while in band Z)
* At the artist level (X plays Y)
Cheers,
y
Bob Ferris
Maybe, you can also use the Cognitive Characteristics Ontology[1], for
that purpose, e.g.
ex:APerson
a foaf:Person ;
foaf:name "John White" ;
cco:skill <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Piano> .
ex:ACharacteristic
a cco:CognitiveCharacteristic ;
cco:agent ex:APerson ;
cco:topic <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Piano> ;
cco:characteristic cco:skill ;
wo:weight [
a wo:Weight ;
wo:weight_value 6.0 ;
wo:scale ex:AScale
] ;
cco:activity
<http://sw.opencyc.org/concept/Mx4rvVjUJ5wpEbGdrcN5Y29ycA> # a
representation for the activity "playing"
] .
One can also model the membership and performance level with help of
cco:CharacteristicDynamics[2].
Cheers,
Bob
[1] http://purl.org/ontology/cco/cognitivecharacteristics.html
[2]
http://purl.org/ontology/cco/cognitivecharacteristics.html#CharacteristicDynamics