search

OpenEnergyPlatform / ontology

Repository for the Open Energy Ontology (OEO)
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
109 stars 23 forks source link

add relation between market participant and commodity #1916

Open stap-m opened 1 month ago

stap-m commented 1 month ago

Some time ago, I got the feedback that the label trades might be misleading because it could be understood as a relation between a "trading agent" and a commodity, i.e. as the inverse of a relation "is traded by". Should we do something about that?

That is in my view a separate discussion from what we try to solve in this issue. What about a new issue where we introduce the relation between the market participant and the commodity offered?

Originally posted by @l-emele in https://github.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/ontology/issues/1239#issuecomment-2339879809

madbkr commented 3 weeks ago

If I understand it correctly, then trades and is traded at are currently inverse of each other and are between a product and a market exchange.

What is missing is a relation between a commodity and a market participant. Maybe I'm not thinking far enough, but buys/sells and is bought/sold feels intuitive to me? Other lables that come to mind are deals or exchanges. I have to admit though that trades would have been more intuitive than either of those.

stap-m commented 3 weeks ago

Maybe we can get some inspiration from other existing ontologies that deal with markets, or even or reuse existing concepts. @madbkr could take a look whats out there? A starting point to search might be https://terminology.nfdi4ing.de/ts/, you could also check FIBO ontology. Maybe there are others...

madbkr commented 3 weeks ago

I have not found a lot in other ontologies. I don't think any of this will be the solution to this problem, a new relation seems more reasonable to me.

An ontology Ontology of Commercial Exchange (OCE) was suggested 5 years ago but apparently that never happened - or I can't find it. The paper has some thoughts on related topics like this: Act of commercial exchange =def. social act involving two parties in which each party transfers something of value to the other party, either a good or a service, and in which relevant deontic roles begin to inhere in one party or the other.

FIBO: We have buys and sells with domain/range as buyer or seller respectively and product. Both of those are roles (children of the agent role). Trade and Trader are not helpful for our problem. Commodity or good exist but are not used in any way we could copy. There are no relations linking them as we would like.

There is no market participant, but there is exchange participant. Again it is used with roles to be part of an exchange (no relations as we are looking for).

The only relation even vaguely in the right direction is is provided by: The target or range of this property should be read as always being some kind of 'relative thing', that is a thing defined in some context. Generally this will be a 'party in role'. This property is not intended to be used to relate a thing to some independent thing which it is provided by, only to something in the role of being that which provides it.

All Core Ontology (CCO) Has no fitting relations but a class that at least relates to the problem: Act of Purchsing An Act of Financial Instrument Use wherein a Financial Instrument is used by an Agent (the Purchaser) to acquire a good or service from another Agent (the Provider).

I found no other ontology that really touched on the concepts we are looking for.