- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:44:11 +0200
- To: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>
- Cc: Tadej tajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si>, Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, David Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>, raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr, Multilingual Web LT Public List Public List <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>, Giuseppe.Rizzo@eurecom.fr, "Pablo N. Mendes" <pablomendes@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <CAL58czoJo7abAG21b8WeYhcRMhQPz6+GOAbWLgypstowfFPUMg@mail.gmail.com>
Great idea.
I am now wondering wether we should organize more such breakout sessions. I
will discuss with David and Dave before the meeting.
Felix
Am 24.09.2012 11:43 schrieb "Arle Lommel" <arle.lommel@dfki.de>:
> Great then, Tadej. I'll bring a copy of the draft you provided with some
> notes, so we can discuss there. We might want to grab Felix as well since
> he is more or less the keeper of the overall document.
>
> Best,
>
> ARle
>
> On 2012 Sep 24, at 11:39 , Tadej Štajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'd be glad for any help with consolidating this with the terminology used
> elsewhere. It seems that the domains covered here are diverse enough to
> have conflicting terms ("target", as Dave pointed out).
>
> -- Tadej
>
> On 24. 09. 2012 11:34, Arle Lommel wrote:
>
> Agreed. When I was looking through the disambiguation text for editing
> last week (I didn't get far because I was out sick on Friday), one thing I
> noticed was that this section, unlike most of the others, had a fairly
> extensive terms and definitions section. We need to ensure, if at all
> possible, that the terms there match the terms elsewhere, or we need to
> specifically note that the term is used differently in this section (and
> this only as a last resort). Ideally we should have all terms and
> definitions in a separate section for the entire document, but since these
> apply only to the section and it is different in kinds from many of the
> others, I think it may well make sense to leave them in it.
>
> I also wasn't sure about some of the definitions, which seem to presume
> a discourse that I'm not sure we can assume (and if it makes me confused, I
> think we can assume that the typical audience for this may be confused as
> well). For example, we have this:
>
> Entity: an object that has a real existence.
>
> In a technical sense (i.e., assuming specific definitions of "object,"
> "real," and "existence") this may be true, but for the typical reader this
> would seem to limit entities to *concrete* objects, which isn't what we
> want. (After all, Sauron from the Lord of the Rings, is a named entity, but
> I don't think Sauron is “an object that has a real existence” in the common
> understanding of those words since Sauron is a *fictional* entity.)
>
> Tadej, it might make sense for me to join with you in reviewing this
> since I have spent some time with it. I don't have a problem with the
> technical content: my only issues are with terminology, so I imagine we can
> pretty quickly arrive at a good text.
>
> Best,
>
> -Arle
>
> On 2012 Sep 24, at 10:32 , David Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>
> One small comment, in the general context of the specification, "target"
> refers more often to target language in the localisation industry sense. So
> to avoid confusion we should try and find an alternative names for the
> "target" and "target type".
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
> On 20 Sep 2012, at 14:00, Tadej Štajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si> wrote:
>
> Hi, all,
>
> I'd keep with the coarse-grained distinction for now, as this can get
> pretty complex, and I believe we've reached the level of expressivity we
> need. I'd still be flexible in terms of adding a definition for another
> level if it would prove necessary.
>
> I like the idea of automatically inferring the disambigLevel from
> targetType - there definitely is a clear mapping, but would this work in
> general? I understand that for lexical concepts and skos:Concepts it could
> work, but for entity types it may be a stretch.
>
> I'm attaching a revised version with some additional revisions and term
> definitions. I've kept the disambigLevel for now, but added that the
> implementors may infer it from the type if they have the capability to do
> so. If we can come up with a clear mapping, we could even drop the
> disambigLevel altogether.
>
> -- Tadej
>
> On 07. 09. 2012 09:53, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
>
>
> 2012/9/7 Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
>
>> Hi Felix,
>>
>> Am 06.09.2012 20 <06.09.2012%2020>:54, schrieb Felix Sasaki:
>>
>> Some people said that we should also drop the "its-disambig-level"
>>> attribute. The three values "lexicalConcept", "ontologyConcept" and
>>> "entity" are just too hard to justify.
>>>
>>
>> Well, it is obvious that you can not represent *all* NLP layers with
>> three values. One problem seems to be the distinction between
>> its-‐target-‐type-‐ref
>> and its-‐disambig-‐level. Target type ref gives the concrete type of
>> the annotation, while disambig level is more coarse grained and on a meta
>> level.
>>
>> In some cases, level is implied by type:
>> http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place -> "entity"
>>
>> http://purl.org/vocabularies/princeton/wn30/synset-Dublin-noun-1 with
>> type:
>> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/wn/wn20/schema/NounSynset -> "lexicalConcept"
>>
>> So currently, disambigLevel is more of a coarse-grained type.
>> Maybe we just use its-target-type for strings and its-target-type-ref?
>>
>> On the other hand, I had the impression that this coarse grained type are
>> really useful and practical and it can really help to put the target type
>> information into boxes fast.
>> One proposal would be to limit disambigLevel to coarse-grained types:
>>
>> In the semantic web world, there are probably 2-5 relevant classes for
>> each level,
>> so "entity" could be one of: foaf:Person,
>> http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Entity100001740,
>> http://www.opengis.net/gml/_Feature
>> while "lexicalConcept" can be one of:
>> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/wn/wn20/schema/Synset,
>> http://www.monnet-project.eu/lemon#LexicalSense
>> ontologyConcept is more difficult maybe skos:Concept ?
>> This grounding/mapping can be done quite fast and is easy to maintain.
>> Alternatively, data producer could either use the types directly or we
>> provide such a mapping. This would produce an easy to handle and robust
>> infrastructure.
>>
>> More comments below.
>>
>>
>> A lot of discussion during the seminar was related to existing ISO
>>> standards like LAF/MAF/GrAF. So far we haven't yet taken the effort to
>>> see
>>> what could be re-used from this realm.
>>>
>>> Finally, we were asked whether we have looked into the work of the open
>>> annotations community group
>>> http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/
>>> and (along the lines of LAF/MAF/GrAF) whether there is something we could
>>> re-use.
>>>
>>> From this I am wondering whether somebody would take actions to talk to
>>> LAF/MAF/GrAF people, and the openannotation group? For the former, I
>>> would
>>> recommend Christian Chiarcos "christian.chiarcos@web.de" as a contact,
>>> but
>>> there may be others.
>>>
>>
>> These two communities have quite a different scope and their efforts seem
>> very far-stretched. For LAF/GrAF I would recommend that somebody with
>> superb XML knowledge has a quick look at the ISO standard. I think, you can
>> quickly see how this is not relevant for this group. The main focus of
>> LAF/GrAF is to represent multi-layers of annotations in a graph and encode
>> that into XML.
>> You might as well start looking at UIMA CAS XML, Gate XML, and TCF by
>> Clarin. I am not sure, what the open annotation community will say about
>> this, they have other annotation targets and use cases: e.g. annotating
>> images or web sites with user comments.
>>
>> Instead of asking more academics, I really hoped, we would ask somebody
>> from industry, now. The list of relevant tools can be found here:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_extraction#Tools
>> I can forward ask my colleague Ali Khalili (who implemented
>> http://rdface.aksw.org/lite/test/tinymce/examples/rdface_lite.html ) to
>> check whether Spotlight, OpenCalais, Alchemy, Extractiv, Evri, Saplo and
>> Lupedia can produce this information and whether they produce something
>> else that might be important. I can also offer to establish a contact to
>> Semantic Web Company, Zemanta and Ontos about the proposal. Raphael and
>> Giuseppe might know more people.
>>
>
> That would be ... just great.
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
>
>
>>
>> All the best,
>> Sebastian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> It's important - that was also mentioned - that we get feedback of these
>>> and other groups before going to last call, to avoid surprises.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Felix
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/8/30 Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like a very good solution to me, simple, clear and absolutely
>>>>> sufficient.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Sebastian
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 30.08.2012 16:29, schrieb Tadej Stajner:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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<
>>>>>>>> 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<
>>>>>>>>> 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 <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:hellmann@informatik.**uni-leipzig.de<
>>>>>>>>> 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://nerd.eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place<
>>>>>>>>> http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>>>>>>>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin<
>>>>>>>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/wn/**wn20/instances/worsense-**
>>>>>>>>> capital-noun-3<
>>>>>>>>> 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://nerd.eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place<
>>>>>>>>> http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>>>>>>>>> - http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**Place<
>>>>>>>>> http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Place>
>>>>>>>>> - http://www.monnet-project.eu/**lemon#LexicalSense<
>>>>>>>>> http://www.monnet-project.eu/lemon#LexicalSense>
>>>>>>>>> - http://www.monnet-project.eu/**lemon#LexicalEntry<
>>>>>>>>> http://www.monnet-project.eu/lemon#LexicalEntry>
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>> http://wordnet.princeton.edu/**wndatamodel#NounWordSense<
>>>>>>>>> http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wndatamodel#NounWordSense>
>>>>>>>>> - http://wordnet.princeton.edu/**wndatamodel#Synset<
>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>> <http://nerd.eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place<
>>>>>>>>> http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> its-disambig-ident-ref="http:/**/dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin<
>>>>>>>>> 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<
>>>>>>>>> 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<
>>>>>>>>> hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:hellmann@informatik.**uni-leipzig.de<
>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>> <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-**
>>>>>>>>> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-multilingualweb-**>
>>>>>>>>> lt/2012Aug/0168.html<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-**
>>>>>>>>> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-multilingualweb-**>
>>>>>>>>> lt-tests/2012Aug/0003.html<htt**p://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/******<
>>>>>>>>> http://dbpedia.org/resource/****>
>>>>>>>>> Dublin
>>>>>>>>> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/****Dublin<
>>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>> <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>><
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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/**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/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.**<
>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/****ontologyConcept%7Chttp://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/**>
>>>>>>>>> <http://w3.org/2005/11/its/**>
>>>>>>>>> ontologyConcept%7Chttp://www.****w3.org/2005/11/its/
>>>>>>>>> <http://w3.org/2005/11/its/><h**ttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/**
>>>>>>>>> ontologyConcept%7Chttp://www.**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>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <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/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://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://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://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/****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://umbel.org/umbel/rc/Location_**Underspecified>
>>>>>>>>> <http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**Location_**Underspecified<
>>>>>>>>> http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/Location_**Underspecified>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <htt**p://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.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://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://nerd.**eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place<
>>>>>>>>>> http://nerd.eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <http://nerd.**eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place<
>>>>>>>>> http://eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>>>>>>>>> <http://eurecom.fr/ontology#**Place<
>>>>>>>>> http://eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <http://nerd.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
>>>>>>>>> man
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...
Received on Monday, 24 September 2012 10:44:39 UTC