Submissions:Co-participation
From Odp
| If you are a member of quality committee please visit the
If you are author of this proposal or you want to contribute to this pattern's review, you can: specify if this revision takes in account any of the review(s) In general, it could be useful to visit the evaluation section to have information about the evaluation process of this proposal Current revision ID: 9073 |
Graphical representation
Diagram
General description
| Name: | Co-participation |
|---|---|
| Submitted by: | AldoGangemi |
| Also Known As: | |
| Intent: | To represent two objects that both participate in a same event. |
| Domains: | |
| Competency Questions: |
|
| Solution description: | - |
| Reusable OWL Building Block: | http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/cp/owl/coparticipation.owl (904) |
| Consequences: | Any two objects, agents, etc. participating in a same event, even partly or for some limited time, can be related. The pattern provides room for representing participation in that event as well, by importing the Submissions:Participation pattern.
This patterns does not allow to express the complete relation between an event and its participants: this has to be added manually. |
| Scenarios: | Mike and Greta had a great fun together, Aldo Gangemi and Valentina Presutti co-participate at the ISWC 2007 conference. |
| Known Uses: | |
| Web References: | |
| Other References: | |
| Examples (OWL files): | |
| Extracted From: | |
| Reengineered From: | |
| Has Components: | |
| Specialization Of: | |
| Related CPs: |
Elements
The Co-participation Content OP locally defines the following ontology elements:
coparticipatesWith (owl:ObjectProperty) A symmetric binary relation between objects. It is intedned to represent coparticipation in same event, and such event and the related participation relations should be added separately.
coparticipatesWith pageAdditional information
Scenarios
No scenario is added to this Content OP.
Reviews
There is no review about this proposal. This revision (revision ID 9073) takes in account the reviews: none
Other info at evaluation tab
Modeling issues
There is no Modeling issue related to this proposal.
References
