From Odp

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Include Image
{{Include Image
{{Content OP Proposal Template
{{Content OP Proposal Template

Revision as of 11:28, 6 March 2009

This pattern has been certified.

Related submission, with evaluation history, can be found here

If you are a member of quality committee please visit the

evaluation section

If you are author of this proposal or you want to contribute to this pattern's review, you can:

In general, it could be useful to visit the evaluation section to have information about the evaluation process of this proposal

Current revision ID: 3622


General description

Name: PharmaInnova
Submitted by: User:Sandra Kohler
Also Known As:
Intent: To describe invoices with the PharmaInnova Model. We think this schema can be useful for other invoice models as well.


Competency Questions:
Solution description:
Reusable OWL Building Block: (491)
Known Uses:
Web References:
Other References:
Examples (OWL files):
Extracted From:
Reengineered From:
Has Components:
Specialization Of:
Related CPs:


The PharmaInnova Content OP locally defines the following ontology elements:

Class Header (owl:Class) The header usually contains important information to identify the invoice like for example the complete address and the company-identification-code.
Header page
Class Body (owl:Class) The body contains all relevant invoice information like the amount of products, their net price etc.
Body page
Class Summary (owl:Class) Contains a summary of the most relevant invoice information like the payment terms and the total amount.
Summary page
Class Invoice (owl:Class)
Invoice page
ObjectProperty has_summary (owl:ObjectProperty)
has_summary page
ObjectProperty has_header (owl:ObjectProperty)
has_header page
ObjectProperty has_body (owl:ObjectProperty)
has_body page




Scenarios about PharmaInnova

No scenario is added to this Content OP.


Reviews about PharmaInnova

There is no review about this proposal. This revision (revision ID 3622) takes in account the reviews: none

Other info at evaluation tab

Personal tools
Quality Committee
Content OP publishers