brendan

Architecture: Contracting firm

2008-09-05T00:25:55.0012Z

similar issues exists with other properties of /architecture/structure: architectural firm, engineering firm, architect, engineer. you're right. it's not well normalized. i like your idea of a mediator/role. I think what I'd like to do is keep the properties that I currently have on /architecture/structure

architectural firm
contractor
engineering firm

and have the expected type for each one be a different mediator type with a whole bunch of information about the role:

project
client
firm
start date
end date

perhaps, in the case of the contractor role there could be someone way of "tagging" the role as one of sub or general contractor. other properties could be added as needed: list of staff members and their roles? there is some question about how much detail we really need, as with it comes schema complexity. anyhow, any other thoughts on this?

Architecture: Contracting firm

2008-09-02T08:36:59.0018Z

I think the "architectural contractor" table should be a mediator - not a topic. A contractor is a role, not a company. This role requires a client, a project and a contracting firm. Also, a distinction is often made between the general contractor and sub contractors - neither fo which are architectural. Thoughts?

Architecture: Time-series building function

2008-08-20T10:08:21.0012Z

I agree.

I have even thought if it would be good to have a valid time range for all relations by default. For example a name of a person can change. The area of a location(city , country, ...) can change(city is growing; war). The "Contains, Contained by, Adjoins, ..." of a Location can change over time (war, ...).

IMHO, The current data scheme does not reflect the fact that everthing is in constant flow and everything is changing over time.

I know there exists facts which do not change over time. For example a parent of a person will probably always be a parent of this person. But many of the relations currently in freebase will change if time passes, not because they are wrong - because reality will change.

Just some thoughts,

Ralf

Architecture: Time-series building function

2008-08-20T05:46:49.0017Z

Building function changes over time. See Hyde Park Barracks for an example -- the blurb covers most of the building uses so you can compare with what I set in the property.

Could we turn building function into a CVT with start/end dates, please? I'm using topics like the above in a personal domain about a certain period of history (convict-era Sydney) and it looks very odd from the domain POV to have all the uses there without explanation. See this view for an example

brendan: No-name postal code?

2008-07-18T02:06:31.0007Z

When we switched to the new address UI, the client no longer creates postal code topics with a display name. There's an open bug to have a periodic gardening task update the display name with the postal code value.

In this particular case, this topic is incorrect because it does not have a value for the postal code property.

We should relink whatever this is linked to this topic to the topic that has the country United States and the postal code value of 'none'.

brendan: No-name postal code?

2008-07-18T02:01:31.0013Z

Hey Brendan, I was just wondering what's up with http://www.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f8000000007ba3fe2

Structure: Design Started property?

2008-06-25T07:04:39.0003Z

The exact date tends not to be publicised, but the existence of press releases for planned structures (see Guggenheim Museum Abu Dhabi as an example) tends to precede actual construction by a long time.

Perhaps some incorporation of press releases (as in being a subject matter) might be more appropriate?

Structure: Design Started property?

2008-06-25T02:40:26.0002Z

this sounds reasonable, but is there really data available? it seems as though the start of design is not often documented.

Structure: Design Started property?

2008-06-23T15:32:52.0005Z

Architects and Engineers tend to begin designing a structure years ahead of the beginning of Construction. Could a 'Design Started' property be added?

Architecture: Archiportal News: Rudolph Schindler and Bay Area architects too!

2008-03-26T19:24:58.0012Z

Archiportal is a useful way to browse freebase architecture data because it puts the data in its context: on a map. We actually have some pretty cool data in there! The following architects have something close to their complete (existing) works:

Architecture: Tombs & Monuments

2007-10-26T19:23:04.0007Z

Let's keep sculptures and buildings separate. I know, they're both "built things" in some sense but to be practical we've drawn a line between the two things: arts and crafts and "the built environment" (buildings, bridges, parks, towers)

So my suggestion is, if it's a sculpture within a building, create a separate topic for that thing (even if it's a bas relief that's part of a structural element of the building). If it could be argued that the thing is both a building/structure *and* a sculpture I guess you could type it as both.

as for monument/tomb, perhaps that should be a simple co-type under /architecture (i.e it should be both a structure and a monument/tomb)

/architecture/structure has several properties that impart/imply design attribution: architect, architectural firm, engineer, engineering firm (I suppose contractor, is another one)

this is pretty limiting. e.g. If I designed my own home, I might list myself as the architect of that building in freebase, but that is asserting that I'm an architect, which I'm not.

I suppose I could have a generic property "designer" but that would be a little confusing. In the end, I would rather risk having some false/fuzzy assertions made than add the complexity.

Architecture: Tombs & Monuments

2007-10-25T23:58:57.0012Z

They are definitely a structure, but in the case of Italian Renaissance in particular, Tombs had sculptural elements if not almost free-standing sculptures often executed by a second individual (who was primarily a sculptor and not an architect).

Monuments can be considered to be more of a sculpture/sculptural grouping than strictly a structure

Prime example would be the Funerary-Tombs:

The Medici Chapel by Michelango
Tomb of Antipope John XXIII
Many works within St. Peter's in Rome.

I guess they could be cotyped as sculptures...Or maybe a new type Monument/Tomb?

Architecture: I'm going to create the "Ownership" cvt in a couple of days

2007-10-10T17:31:13.0007Z

this is done.

Architecture: howdy - architectural properties that are for sale

2007-10-08T04:32:00.0011Z

whoops, meant to reply, see new thread below...

Architecture: I'm going to create the "Ownership" cvt in a couple of days

2007-10-07T22:03:25.0021Z

the ownership type:

"architect"
"structure"
"start date"
"end date"

all will be unique, so you will just create multiple ownership objects for each owner (even if 2 people owned it at the same time) The "who paid for it to be built" might sometimes be the same person as the first owner, sometimes not.
Perhaps we could call that the "developer", sometimes it's a person, sometimes it's a company. I'd like to chew on that a little.

A side note: I'm reluctant to start thinking about real estate/legal aspects of this (legal nature of the ownership, prices/fees paid, etc) as that will complicate things (people usually own properties that include land and other buildings which i don't want to model now) The focus is on the historical aspect. Let me know if I'm on the right track, here...

Architecture: howdy - architectural properties that are for sale

2007-10-07T06:19:28.0007Z

I think you're right that the initial client should be separate from the dated list of owners.

Architecture: howdy - architectural properties that are for sale

2007-10-02T19:38:09.0007Z

So it's usually quite significant to have the initial client/owner for a noted or historically significant home/building...Maybe after architect list the client/initial owner. Then further below the owners with period of ownership.

Remodeling with associated architects-client and date would be another item of interest for later on.

Architecture: howdy - architectural properties that are for sale

2007-10-02T04:49:29.0007Z

Then again, look at Kaufman Desert House where there is a list of owners. I think we need the CVT with start/end to clean this up.

Architecture: howdy - architectural properties that are for sale

2007-10-02T04:47:46.0000Z

I think you're right that Owner should be a compound value type that includes at least start and end. Unless of course you want Owner to mean "who paid to have the structure built" in which case there's only one. That seems to be what the data shows now.

Architecture: howdy - architectural properties that are for sale

2007-04-11T19:21:17.0006Z

Jack, I apologize for the late reply. We're working on a much better system for following discussion threads, I missed this one.

Do you have any ideas about how this could be modeled? Given that properties go on sale multiple times in their life time, we might want to model it such that the data reflects this history. I'd also like to look at "Owner" for /architecture/structure which currently has an expected type of /common/person but fails to capture other important details (start, end, purchase price)

I look forward to hearing from you on this.

Architecture: howdy - architectural properties that are for sale

2007-04-05T03:04:56.0012Z

I'm planning on doing some work in fb around property and real estate data, and I have especially interested in architectural properties that are currently on the market. (see all properties by this architect that are for sale).

Kurt B. invited me in to do some prototyping in the real estate space, so before I started building in here I thought I would make some noise.

...need to go poke around and see what has been done around "things that are for sale"...

Architect: a neat query

2007-04-02T20:13:52.0006Z

I'll get you half way there: soon the query editor will take ?q= so that you can bring the user to the query editor with the query pre-populated.

Architecture: some closure

2007-03-01T04:48:25.0012Z

I've added the types "Engineer" and "Engineering Firm." I boldly claim "Structure" as *the* type of the "Built Environment." :) Though some things, such as "Bridge" actually belong to another domain (Transportation) "Structure" is an "included type." All bridges are structures. It is structure that imparts the important properties of attribution: Engineer, Engineering Firm, Architect, Architectural Firm, Contractor. Basic properties such as "Address" and "Opened" and "Height" are also imparted by "Structure."

brendan: test45

2007-02-22T00:04:31.0011Z

test

Architecture: Tower and Bridge types added

2007-02-02T06:10:38.0007Z

FYI, it's not really 6am, it's 10pm and I've just deleted the "Bridge" type before anyone has a chance to use it. I realized, I should consult with a few folks about whether "Bridge" should be in a new domain rather than "Architecture." Perhaps Stuctural and Civil Engineering? Not sure.

Architecture: Tower and Bridge types added

2007-02-02T06:02:35.0006Z

Yes, bridges are "structures" but I suppose it might qualify for it's own domain. Or perhaps Architecture should be Architecture and Structural Engineering. Then what about the Construction field? Yikes! Just thinking aloud here.

Architecture: Tower and Bridge types added

2007-02-02T05:47:22.0015Z

Both should be co-typed with "Structure". I have not filled out the schema for either of these types. "Structure" imparts the height property. Tower probably wants not much more than height. Bridge, well I'm quite sure I'm out of my league with bridges. I'm sure a bridge fanatic would have many ideas about what properties it should have (or indeed whether a mere single type is enough to cover the field)

Architect: a neat query

2007-01-25T05:49:38.0006Z

maybe something like this.

Architect: a neat query

2007-01-25T05:36:34.0006Z

i wish there was a way to format this query into a link, so we can just click on it to see the results. i wonder...

Architect: a neat query

2007-01-25T02:51:38.0011Z

this can be done using the query editor .

I'm asking: Show me all architects (by name) and the structures they designed who are nationals of Austria (note that by asking the nationality I am crossing types so I must ask for that property with a "full path".

{
"query":[{
"type":"/architecture/architect",
"name":null,
"structures_designed":[],
"/common/person/nationality":"Austria"

}]
}

brendan: test3

2007-01-23T07:31:36.0005Z

test

brendan: another

2007-01-18T21:01:02.0011Z

test

brendan: Just a test

2007-01-04T01:08:12.0011Z

testing
1
2
3