Submissions:VesselWaterArea
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: 9142 |
Graphical representation
Diagram
General description
Name: | VesselWaterArea |
---|---|
Submitted by: | AlessandroAdamou |
Also Known As: | |
Intent: | to represent a direct relation between vessel types and water areas regardless of what type of fishing gear is fitted |
Domains: | |
Competency Questions: |
|
Solution description: | --- |
Reusable OWL Building Block: | http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/cp/owl/fsdas/vesselwaterarea.owl (777) |
Consequences: | The pattern can be used to represent a water area setting and the vessels that can be used there, no matter whether these constraints are legal or logistic. The hasWaterArea object property is used as in the gearwaterarea pattern. Usage of this property as applied to VesselTypes is related to, but not strictly dependent on the hasWaterArea property as applied to GearTypes. |
Scenarios: | in which water areas are 'gillneters' used? |
Known Uses: | |
Web References: | |
Other References: | |
Examples (OWL files): | |
Extracted From: | |
Reengineered From: | |
Has Components: | |
Specialization Of: | |
Related CPs: |
Elements
The VesselWaterArea Content OP locally defines the following ontology elements:
Additional information
(type): http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology
(versionInfo): 1.1
(imports): http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/schemas/cpannotationschema.owl
(versionInfo): Created by Alessandro Adamou
Scenarios
No scenario is added to this Content OP.
Reviews
Review article | Posted on | About revision (current is 9142) |
---|---|---|
AldoGangemi about VesselWaterArea | 245490817 March 2009 | 36873,687 |
This revision (revision ID 9142) takes in account the reviews: none
Other info at evaluation tab
Modeling issues
There is no Modeling issue related to this proposal.
References