Restructuring individuals: analytical approach

[Ludee]

Description of the issue

As described in https://github.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/ontology/issues/859 most of the individuals in the OEO are lacking a definition. In addition the upper classes are evaluated again.

Ideas of solution

Type	Individual	Definition
analytical approach	bottom up	Bottom up is an analytical approach ~~and a system design approach~~ where parts of the system are defined in details. Once these parts are designed and developed, then these parts or components are linked together to prepare a bigger component. This approach is repeated until the complete system is built. A bottom up model is based on a composition approach.
analytical approach	hybrid	Hybrid is an analytical approach ~~and a system design approach~~ that combines the top down and the bottom up approach. Some parts are based on composition approach while other parts are based on decomposition approach.
analytical approach	top down	Top down is an analytical approach ~~and a system design approach~~ where design starts from the system as a whole. The system is then divided into smaller sub-applications with more details. Each part again goes through the top-down approach till the complete system is designed with all minute details. Top Down approach is also termed as breaking the bigger problem into smaller problems and solving them individually in recursive manner. A top down model is based on a decomposition approach.

l-emele commented yesterday: abc is an analytical approach and a system design approach that xyz: These definitions break mono-hierarchy. As we dont't have system design approach in the OEO, I suggest to shorten these definitions to abc is an analytical approach that xyz. Apart from that, I like the definitions of the analytical approach individuals, as they also show the relations to other things. However, I am asking myself whether these individuals in fact subclasses. @stap-m @jannahastings , what do you think?

Workflow checklist

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

I am aware that

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

[jannahastings]

For me these seem class-like rather than individual-like because surely there is more than one analytical approach that could be characterised as 'top-down' or 'bottom-up'? They don't seem (to me) to pick out an individual specific entity that is completely unambiguous as such, but rather perhaps a family of approaches that share common features?

[l-emele]

If I interpret the thumbs up to the last comment correctly, we reached here an agreement to implement bottom up, hybrid and top down as classes with the definition above.

[chrwm]

An agreement on this issue seems to be reached. Should this issue stay open for educational purposes? If yes, the milestone should be removed. If not, are there other reasons that speak against implementation?

[l-emele]

It does not make sense to leave an issue open for so long, just to have it as good first issue. There are more of them. And in my view it is not even a good first issue as converting an individual to a class is a bit tricky.

I'll just implement this now.