sectors from German BSI-KritisV

[stap-m]

Description of the issue

Should we add the sector divisions based on the German Verordnung zur Bestimmung Kritischer Infrastrukturen nach dem BSI-Gesetz (BSI-Kritisverordnung - BSI-KritisV)? It contains sectors of critical infrastructure. Some of it is clearly out of scope for OEO, but it contains detailed sectors for energy and transportation. We could think of adding the hierarchy only partially.

Not sure, whether it fits, or not, though...

Ideas of solution

If you already have ideas for the solution describe them here

Workflow checklist

• [ ] I discussed the issue with someone else than me before working on a solution
• [ ] I already read the latest version of the workflow for this repository
• [ ] The goal of this ontology is clear to me

I am aware that

• [ ] every entry in the ontology should have a definition
• [ ] classes should arise from concepts rather than from words

[l-emele]

Proposal for new individuals:

• BSI-KritisV sector division: The BSI-KritisV sector division is a sector division by the German regulation BSI-Kritisverordnung (BSI-KritisV) defining eight sectors that contain critical infrastructures.
• BSI-KritisV energy sector: The BSI-KritisV energy sector is an energy sector defined by the BSI-KritisV sector division (§ 2 BSI-KritisV).
• BSI-KritisV transport sector: The BSI-KritisV transport sector is a transport sector defined by the BSI-KritisV sector division (§ 8 BSI-KritisV).

Maybe it is useful to additionally define a class critical infrastructure.

[stap-m]

Maybe it is useful to additionally define a class critical infrastructure.

Proposal: Critical infrastructure is an artificial object that has the critical infrastructure role. Critical infrastructure role is the role of artificial objects, such as plants and systems, that are assessed to be cruicial for the preservation of societal functions, health, safety and economical or social welfare. definition source: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0114 / https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kritische_Infrastrukturen

[l-emele]

In general I agree to the proposals for critical infrastructure and critical infrastructure role. However I think, an infrastructure is not an object but rather an object aggregate or a system. See e.g. the Wikipedia description: Infrastructure is the set of facilities and systems that serve a country, city, or other area, and encompasses the services and facilities necessary for its economy, households and firms to function.

[stap-m]

However I think, an infrastructure is not an object but rather an object aggregate or a system.

I also thougt about object aggregates. However, my application goal is to make it possible to identify a certain facility as critical infrastructure. E.g. a certain gas power plant. Of course, it is "part of" all critical infrastructure, but should be annotatable with the critical infrastructure role anyway.

What about changing the def of critical infrastructure, comprising the whole set of critical facilities and systems? Critical infrastructure is an object aggregate of artificial objects and systems which have the critical infrastructure role.

[l-emele]

I agree with this new proposal.

[l-emele]

So ready for implementation? Who can do this?

[stap-m]

@viktorwichern ?