W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [all] Call for consensus on disambiguation [ACTION-181]

From: Tadej Stajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 16:29:52 +0200
Message-ID: <503F78E0.9080401@ijs.si>
To: Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
CC: "Pablo N. Mendes" <pablomendes@gmail.com>, "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>, "raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr" <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>, "Giuseppe.Rizzo@eurecom.fr" <Giuseppe.Rizzo@eurecom.fr>
Hi, all,
Co-existence of disambiguaton is not that important - I also can't 
justify a real use case for it. The point is more about specifying what 
level we're disambiguating on. I'm in favor of keeping the disambigLevel 
solution and not introducing a new set of attributes, trading off 
coexistence.

I also propose a different solution for the 'disambigSource' and 
'entityTypeSource' scenario, which are mostly redundant in RDF: the user 
can use either only a disambigIdentRef to specify a URI for the target 
entity, or a pair of disambigSource and disambigIdent strings in order 
to cover use cases, where the meanings don't have addressable URIs.

Major differences:
* entityType -> generalize to targetType, cover all levels;
* disambigType -> rename to disambigLevel, change constants from 
literals to URIs.
* disambigSource* -> disambigSource, restrict usage to disambiguating 
with non-URI identifiers
* disambigIdentRef -> disambigIdentRef* for URI identifier + 
disambigIdent for local identifiers in the scope of a disambigSource
* entityTypeSource* -> dropped

-- Tadej

On 8/20/2012 5:01 PM, Sebastian Hellmann wrote:
> Hi all,
> digging to the core of the problem:
>
> How many layers of annotations do you need? entity, dictionaryEntry, 
> lexicalMeaning, pragmaticMeaning,  some other layer ... The problem is 
> that the XML attribute data structure is not appropriate to handle 
> this kind of information. So we really need to decide how many layers 
> we need. If you were to leave this open, I would suggest:
> its-disambig-type-ref-1, its-entity-type-ident-ref-1 , 
> its-disambig-type-ref-2, its-entity-type-ident-ref-2, 
> its-disambig-type-ref-3, its-entity-type-ident-ref-3, ....
> But that is not XML-like.
>
> So question is for how many levels/layers do we require coexistence? 
> Otherwise its-disambig-type-ref would be sufficient to give the 
> level/layer (even more fine grained informationm, e.g. an entity of 
> type place) .
>
> Regarding isDefinedBy : It is recommended to use it, but, of course, 
> you don't go to prison, if you forget it ;) Especially with # - OWL 
> classes, isDefinedBy is not necessary, as the # part is cut away for 
> any retrieval request, anyhow.
>
> All the best,
> Sebastian
>
>
> Am 20.08.2012 12:11, schrieb Tadej Štajner:
>> Hi, Pablo,
>> correct. The feedback I got was that this distinction is very 
>> important, but I can't think of an example with the scenario you 
>> mention. Perhaps for spans where one is contained within the other, 
>> such as assigning a lexical meaning to a word, while the whole phrase 
>> is an entity, for example 'agriculture' in 'Ministry of agriculture'.
>>
>> I think it boils down to this: could this property be reliably 
>> inferred from the target itself? For instance, if someone points to 
>> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/wn/wn20/instances/worsense-capital-noun-3 - 
>> can we expect that is definitely a case of lexical disambiguation?
>>
>> -- Tadej
>>
>>
>> On 20. 08. 2012 11:42, Pablo N. Mendes wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>     I would suggest  to merge "its-entity-type-ident-ref" into
>>>     "its-disambig-type-ref".
>>>
>>>
>>> If I understand correctly this is the same proposal I made at the call?
>>>
>>> "<pablomendes> wrt. its:disambigType = (word | entity) can't the 
>>> distinction between word and entity be inferred from entityTypeRef? 
>>> e.g. wiktionary:doc is a word, dbpedia:Dog is an entity" [1]
>>>
>>> If so, this is the answer that Tadej gave:
>>>
>>> "tadej: disambiguation use cases are often used in cases where text 
>>> is short and lacks context
>>> ... and computational lingusitic community draw a clear distinction 
>>> ebtween lexical and conceptual meaning" [1]
>>>
>>> Perhaps one way to test how strong is this requirement would be to 
>>> think of use cases where one could assign both lexical and 
>>> conceptual meaning to the same span.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Pablo
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2012/07/26-mlw-lt-minutes.html
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org 
>>> <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Hi Sebastian,
>>>
>>>     2012/8/20 Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de
>>>     <mailto:hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>>
>>>
>>>         Hi Felix,
>>>         your proposal is based on the assumption, that more data is
>>>         available at these three URLs:
>>>
>>>         http:/nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place
>>>         <http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>>>         http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin
>>> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/wn/wn20/instances/worsense-capital-noun-3
>>>
>>>         While this assumption is ok for the Semantic Web, I am not
>>>         sure about the ITS world.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     You are right that in the "ITS world" one cannot be sure that more
>>>     data is available. But I would argue that implementors who process
>>>     links also in the ITS world very likely need to know (not
>>>     automatically, but as a prerequisite for implementation ) what the
>>>     URL is about. So I'd rather encourage implementors towards that
>>>     "Semantic Web like" approach than defining so many attributes.
>>>
>>>     Feedback from the people who want to process "disambiguation"
>>>     without Semantic Web processing is of course very important here.
>>>
>>>
>>>         Furthermore, if you are attempting to minimize it, I would
>>>         suggest  to merge
>>>         "its-entity-type-ident-ref" into "its-disambig-type-ref". You
>>>         wouldn't be limited to entity types and could use any of:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Makes sense to me, thanks for the proposal - let's see what Tadej
>>>     and others say.
>>>
>>>     Best,
>>>
>>>     Felix
>>>
>>>
>>>         - http:/nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place
>>>         <http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>>>         - http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Place
>>>         - http://www.monnet-project.eu/lemon#LexicalSense
>>>         - http://www.monnet-project.eu/lemon#LexicalEntry
>>>         - http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wndatamodel#NounWordSense
>>>         - http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wndatamodel#Synset
>>>
>>>         All the best,
>>>         Sebastian
>>>
>>>         Am 20.08.2012 09:44, schrieb Felix Sasaki:
>>>
>>>             Hi Sebastian, all,
>>>
>>>             thanks, Sebastian. From what you say in the wiki and in
>>>             the previous mail,
>>>             I think one could simplify things a lot.
>>>
>>>             The HTML example from Tadej *could* look like this:
>>>
>>>             <html lang="en">
>>>
>>>                 <head>
>>>
>>>                    <meta charset="utf-8" />
>>>
>>>                    <title>Entity: Local Test</title>
>>>
>>>                 </head>
>>>
>>>                 <body>
>>>
>>>                     <p><span
>>>
>>> its-entity-type-ident-ref="http:/nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place
>>>             <http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>"
>>>
>>> its-disambig-ident-ref="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin">Dublin</span> 
>>>
>>>             is the <span
>>>
>>>             its-disambig-ident-ref="
>>> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/wn/wn20/instances/worsense-capital-noun-3">capital</span> 
>>>
>>>             of Ireland.</p>
>>>
>>>                 </body>
>>>
>>>             </html>
>>>
>>>             That is, no explicit "resource" references for entity 
>>> type and
>>>             disambiguation source, and no disambig-type.
>>>
>>>             Also, I think one could get rid of adding this kind of
>>>             information via
>>>             global rules - I really don't see a use case for that.
>>>
>>>             Tadej, others, thoughts? Maybe Yves as one of the
>>>             implementors processing
>>>             the output and other have some thoughts too?
>>>
>>>             Best,
>>>
>>>             Felix
>>>
>>>             2012/8/17 Sebastian Hellmann
>>>             <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de
>>> <mailto:hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>>
>>>
>>>                 Dear Felix,
>>>                 to solve this issue I prepared a page:
>>> http://wiki.nlp2rdf.org/wiki/**DBpedia_Spotlight<http://wiki.nlp2rdf.org/wiki/DBpedia_Spotlight> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                 It is a rough draft, so there are many mistakes,
>>>                 still. Once it is mature,
>>>                 I will send it to the DBpedia Spotlight and Apache
>>>                 Stanbol lists to get
>>>                 their feedback.
>>>                 Note that I don't have a problem with these properties
>>>                 as XML attributes,
>>>                 where they can naturally occur only once and encoding
>>>                 an implicit
>>>                 dependency (attribute refering to another attribute)
>>>                 is unproblematic. They
>>>                 are, however, difficult to handle in RDF, even when
>>>                 declaring them
>>>                 functional.
>>>                 I will report back, if there are any news,
>>>
>>>                 All the best,
>>>                 Sebastian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                 Am 14.08.2012 21:34, schrieb Felix Sasaki:
>>>
>>>                     Hi Sebastian, all,
>>>
>>>                     August is taking its tribute ... I am wondering if
>>>                     there any thoughts on
>>>                     Sebastian's mail below. It seems that some of the
>>>                     proposed ITS attributes
>>>                     are not needed, but I don't have the competence to
>>>                     evaluate this. Thoughts
>>>                     from others?  Sebastian, could you confirm that
>>>                     the output mentioned in
>>>                     this other thread
>>>
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-multilingualweb-**
>>> lt/2012Aug/0168.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Aug/0168.html> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                     is correct for NIF? I then would create a test
>>>                     case for our test suite,
>>>                     see
>>>
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-multilingualweb-**
>>> lt-tests/2012Aug/0003.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-tests/2012Aug/0003.html> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                     Thanks,
>>>
>>>                     Felix
>>>
>>>                     Am Donnerstag, 9. August 2012 schrieb Sebastian
>>>                     Hellmann :
>>>
>>>                       Hi Felix,
>>>
>>>                         below mostly my opinion on this. Nothing,
>>>                         wrong with including these
>>>                         properties, but they might not make sense in
>>>                         RDF. If you think, that
>>>                         there
>>>                         are people who would really use these
>>>                         properties in RDF, then go ahead
>>>                         and
>>>                         include them. Personally, *I* wouldn't know
>>>                         for what *I* could use them.
>>>                         More comments inline.
>>>
>>>                         Am 09.08.2012 15 <tel:09.08.2012%2015>:20,
>>>                         schrieb Felix Sasaki:
>>>
>>>                           its:entityTypeSourceRef
>>>
>>>                               I really do not find this property 
>>> helpful.
>>>
>>>                         Do you see any sense in saying that
>>>                         http://dbpedia.org/resource/****
>>>                         Dublin
>>> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin><http://dbpedia.org/**
>>>                         resource/Dublin
>>> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>>is from
>>>
>>>
>>>                         http://dbpedia.org ? In the linked data world
>>>                         http://dbpedia.org/resource/
>>>                         **Dublin
>>> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>> 
>>>
>>>                         comes from
>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/****Dublin<http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin>< 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>>. 
>>>
>>>                         So you might specify a way to convert that to
>>>                         ITS, but we might not need
>>>
>>>                         an RDF property for this.
>>>
>>>                            its:disambigType
>>>
>>> "(http://www.w3.org/2005/11/****its/lexicalConcept|
>>> <http://www.w3.org/2005/11/****its/lexicalConcept%7C><http://www.w3.org/2005/11/**its/lexicalConcept%7C> 
>>>
>>> <http://**www.w3.org/2005/11/its/**lexicalConcept%7C
>>> <http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/**lexicalConcept%7C><http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/lexicalConcept%7C> 
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/****ontologyConcept|http://www.**w3.**
>>> <http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/****ontologyConcept%7Chttp://www.**w3.**><http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/**ontologyConcept%7Chttp://www.w3.**> 
>>>
>>> org/2005/11/its/<http://www.**w3.org/2005/11/its/**
>>> <http://w3.org/2005/11/its/**>
>>> ontologyConcept%7Chttp://www.**w3.org/2005/11/its/
>>> <http://w3.org/2005/11/its/><http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/ontologyConcept%7Chttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                             entity)"
>>>
>>>                               I am unsure about this one.
>>>
>>>                            its:entityTypeRef
>>>                         is already rdf:type, so it would be a
>>>                         duplicate to have its:entityTypeRef
>>>                         in RDF. For
>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/****Dublin<http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin> 
>>>
>>> <http://dbpedia.org/**resource/Dublin<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin> 
>>>
>>>
>>>                             its:**entityTypeRef would be one of:
>>>
>>> http://dbpedia.org/ontology/****PopulatedPlace<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**PopulatedPlace> 
>>>
>>> <http://dbpedia.**org/ontology/PopulatedPlace<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/PopulatedPlace> 
>>>
>>> http://dbpedia.org/ontology/****Settlement<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**Settlement> 
>>>
>>> <http://dbpedia.org/**ontology/Settlement<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Settlement> 
>>>
>>> http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/****PopulatedPlace<http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**PopulatedPlace> 
>>>
>>> <http://umbel.**org/umbel/rc/PopulatedPlace<http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/PopulatedPlace> 
>>>
>>> http://dbpedia.org/ontology/****Place<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**Place>< 
>>>
>>>                         http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**Place
>>> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Place>>
>>> http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/****Village<http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**Village>< 
>>>
>>>                         http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**Village
>>> <http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/Village>>
>>> http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/****Location_Underspecified<http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**Location_Underspecified> 
>>>
>>> <http:/**/umbel.org/umbel/rc/Location_**Underspecified
>>> <http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/Location_**Underspecified><http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/Location_Underspecified> 
>>>
>>>                         http://schema.org/Place
>>> http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#****Thing<http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#**Thing> 
>>>
>>> <http://www.w3.org/**2002/07/owl#Thing<http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing> 
>>>
>>> http://www.opengis.net/gml/_****Feature<http://www.opengis.net/gml/_**Feature> 
>>>
>>> <http://www.opengis.**net/gml/_Feature<http://www.opengis.net/gml/_Feature> 
>>>
>>>                         +
>>> http:/nerd.eurecom.fr/****ontology#Place
>>> <http://nerd.eurecom.fr/****ontology#Place><http://nerd.eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place> 
>>>
>>> <http://nerd.**eurecom.fr/ontology#Place
>>> <http://eurecom.fr/ontology#Place><http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                         If you have a Problem with this plurality.
>>>                         Then it might be good to
>>>                         include an annotation property
>>>                          its:preferedEntityTypeRef
>>>                         So the data is there already in RDF, the
>>>                         problem is rather to find a way
>>>                         to convert it back to ITS.
>>>
>>>                         All the best,
>>>                         Sebastian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                         Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>                         Felix
>>>
>>>                         2012/8/9 Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org
>>>                         <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>>
>>>
>>>                            Thanks for this, Tadej, looks good. There
>>>                         is just one comment I don't
>>>                         see
>>>                         reflected:
>>>
>>>                         7) A question on the data category in general
>>>                         and the "rules" element:
>>>                         does it make sense to make some attributes
>>>                         mandatory? Currently, this
>>>                         would
>>>                         be valid:
>>>                         <its:disambiguation
>>> selector="/text/body/p[@id='****dublin']/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                         It seems that still all metadata items /
>>>                         attributes are optional. Is
>>>                         there
>>>                         a way to be more specific about what must or
>>>                         must not appear together,
>>>                         what
>>>                         is optional etc?
>>>
>>>                         Best,
>>>
>>>                         Felix
>>>
>>>                         2012/8/9 Tadej Stajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si
>>> <mailto:tadej.stajner@ijs.si>>
>>>
>>>                              Hi,
>>>                             thanks for the tips. I covered them, and I
>>>                         agree towards removing the
>>>                         local XPath, since it has very limited use.
>>>                         Here is another incorporating
>>>                         all these comments.
>>>                         -- Tadej
>>>
>>>                         On 8/3/2012 1:07 PM, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>>>
>>>                         Hi Tadej, all,
>>>
>>>                             thanks a lot for this. Just a few comments
>>>                         / questions:
>>>
>>>                             1) About "The information applies to the
>>>                         textual content of the
>>>                         element, including child elements and
>>>                         attributes.": wouldn't it make more
>>>                         sense to say that this applies to only the
>>>                         content of the element? E.g.
>>>                         if
>>>                         you annotate the "span" element in
>>>
>>>                             <p>I have seen <span id="timbl"><span
>>>                         class="firstame">Tim</span>
>>>                         <span
>>> class="lastname">Berners-Lee</****span></span>
>>>                         in the olympics opening
>>>
>>>
>>>                         ceremony</p>
>>>
>>>                             You want to express disambiguation
>>>                         information about the "span"
>>>                         element
>>>                         with the "id" attribute, but not about the
>>>                         "id" attribute or the nested
>>>                         span elements. So inheritance probably should
>>>                         be: "There is no
>>>                         inheritance". What do you think?
>>>
>>>
>>>                             2) About "The Entity data category can be
>>>                         expressed with global rules,
>>>                         or locally on an individual element.": This
>>>                         should probably be "The
>>>                         Disambiguation data category can be expressed
>>>                         with global rules, or
>>>                         locally
>>>                         on an individual element."
>>>
>>>                             3) About local markup: for other data
>>>                         categories, we don't have the
>>>                         "pointer" attributes as local markup, since
>>>                         processing of XPath in local
>>>                         markup can be very expensive. So I would
>>>                         propose to drop the local
>>>                         pointer
>>>                         attributes here too.
>>>
>>>                             4) In the table at the end, "Global
>>>                         pointing to existing information"
>>>                         should be "yes" I think.
>>>
>>>                             5) This selector
>>>                         <its:disambiguation
>>>                         selector="/text/body/p/#****dublin" ...
>>>                         In XPath should be
>>>                         <its:disambiguation
>>> selector="/text/body/p[@id='****dublin']
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                             6) To follow the conventions from other
>>>                         data categories, the
>>>                         "its:disambiguation" element should probably
>>>                         be called
>>>                         "its:disambiguationRule".
>>>
>>>                             7) A question on the data category in
>>>                         general and the "rules" element:
>>>                         does it make sense to make some attributes
>>>                         mandatory? Currently, this
>>>                         would
>>>                         be valid:
>>>                         <its:disambiguation
>>> selector="/text/body/p[@id='****dublin']/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                             8) A question to the others in this thread
>>>                         (Guiseppe, Pablo, Raphael,
>>>                         Sebastian): is this a representation that
>>>                         makes sense to you and that
>>>                         your
>>>                         tools could produce?
>>>
>>>                             9) A question to the MT guys: is the way
>>>                         "entity and disambiguation"
>>>                         information is represented here useful for you?
>>>
>>>                             Best,
>>>
>>>                             Felix
>>>
>>>                         2012/8/3 Tadej Štajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si
>>> <mailto:tadej.stajner@ijs.si>>
>>>
>>>                            Hi,
>>>                         I incorporated some comments that 'entity' was
>>>                         still conflated from
>>>                         several distinct things in the data category
>>>                         proposal. Now, we
>>>                         distinguish
>>>                         between disambiguation of word sense, ontology
>>>                         concept and entity
>>>                         instance.
>>>                         Following that, it seems that 'Disambiguation'
>>>                         was the better name for
>>>                         the
>>>                         data category.
>>>
>>>                         Thanks for everyone's input!
>>>
>>>                         -- Tadej
>>>
>>>                         On 02. 08. 2012 17
>>>                         <tel:02.%2008.%202012%2017>:26, Tadej Štajner
>>>                         wrote:
>>>
>>>                            Apologies -- wrong link on the previous
>>>                         mail. This is the relevant one:
>>> http://www.w3.org/****International/multilingualweb/**
>>> **lt/track/actions/181<http://www.w3.org/**International/multilingualweb/**lt/track/actions/181> 
>>>
>>> <http://**www.w3.org/International/**multilingualweb/lt/track/**
>>> <http://www.w3.org/International/**multilingualweb/lt/track/**>
>>>
>>>
>>> actions/181<http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/181> 
>>>
>>>                         -- Tadej
>>>
>>>                         On 02. 08. 2012 17
>>>                         <tel:02.%2008.%202012%2017>:22, Tadej Štajner
>>>                         wrote:
>>>
>>>                         Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
>>>                         Department of Computer Science, University of
>>>                         Leipzig
>>>                         Events:
>>>                             *
>>> http://sabre2012.infai.org/****mlode<http://sabre2012.infai.org/**mlode>< 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                         http://sabre2012.infai.org/**mlode
>>> <http://sabre2012.infai.org/mlode>>(Leipzig,
>>>                         Sept. 23-24-25, 2012)
>>>
>>>                             * http://wole2012.eurecom.fr (*Deadline:
>>>                         July 31st 2012*)
>>>                         Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , 
>>> http://dbpedia.org
>>>                         Homepage:
>>> http://bis.informatik.uni-**le**ipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
>>> <http://ipzig.de/SebastianHellmann><http://leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann> 
>>>
>>> <htt**p://bis.informatik.uni-**leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
>>> <http://leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann><http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann> 
>>>
>>>                         Research Group: http://aksw.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                 --
>>>                 Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
>>>                 Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
>>>                 Events:
>>>                    * http://sabre2012.infai.org/**mlode
>>> <http://sabre2012.infai.org/mlode>(Leipzig, Sept.
>>>                 23-24-25, 2012)
>>>                    * http://wole2012.eurecom.fr (*Deadline: July 31st
>>>                 2012*)
>>>                 Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://dbpedia.org
>>>                 Homepage:
>>> http://bis.informatik.uni-**leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
>>> <http://leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann><http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann> 
>>>
>>>                 Research Group: http://aksw.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         --         Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
>>>         Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
>>>         Events:
>>>           * http://sabre2012.infai.org/mlode (Leipzig, Sept. 23-24-25,
>>>         2012)
>>>           * http://wole2012.eurecom.fr (*Deadline: July 31st 2012*)
>>>         Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://dbpedia.org
>>>         Homepage: 
>>> http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
>>>         Research Group: http://aksw.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     --     Felix Sasaki
>>>     DFKI / W3C Fellow
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> ---
>>> Pablo N. Mendes
>>> http://pablomendes.com
>>> Events: http://wole2012.eurecom.fr <http://wole2012.eurecom.fr/>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


Received on Thursday, 30 August 2012 14:30:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:51 UTC