Re: vartrans module

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Manuel Fiorelli <manuel.fiorelli@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Philipp, All
>
> I have just completed the review of the vartrans module. Please find my
> comments below.
>
> Section "Lexico-Semantic Relations"
> -----------------------------------
>
> "The model defines a generic class lexico-semantic relation that allows "
>
> There is a link to a non existing page. I suppose it should have been "
> vartrans:LexicoSemanticRelation"
>
> ------------
>
> Definition box of ObjectProperty: relates
>
> The domain should be vartrans:LexicoSemanticRelation
>
> ------------
>
> The definitions of vartrans:source and vartrans:target explicitly refer
> to translations, but *example1* clearly shows that it can be used in
> general to represent the directionality of a lexico-semantic relation.
> Either the definition should be generalized or *example1* is wrong.
>
The definition is wrong

>
> -------------
>
> The definition of the property vartrans:category should be anticipated,
> because it is used in the *example1*.
>
> -------------
>
> "By lexical relations, we understand those relations at the surface forms,
> mainly motivated by grammatical requirements, style (Wortklang), and
> linguistic economy (helping to avoid excessive denominative repetition and
> improving textual coherence)."
>
> I would like to see more examples. In particular, I would like to see how
> "Orthographic variants" should be represented: indeed, as far as I
> remember, "localize" and "localise" are two written representations of the
> same form. Ideally, I would like to see an example for each top-level item.
>
Yes, we should note that this is covered in part under the core

>
>
> -------------
>
> The property vartrans:context is not associated with an example.
>
I believe this is a ghost. This role is covered by 'ontolex:usage' and thus
we don't need this property, right?

>
> -------------
>
>
> Just before the definition of the property vartrans:category, I can see
> this paragraph:
>
> "Examples of semantic relations are the equivalence relation between two
> senses, hypernymy and hyponymy relations, synonymy, antonymy,
> terminological variation, translation (see below on the latter two types of
> variation)."
>
> At the beginning of the section "Translation", you assert that
> translations are somehow special in the sense that they have a dedicated
> class in the model. In fact, the same holds true for terminological
> variants. Therefore, in place of a "(see below on the latter two types of
> variation)", I would write something like that:
>
> "The vartrans module has a special treatment for the the latter two types
> of variation, which will be discussed thoroughly later"
>
Agreed. Of course it is never explained why these two are so special... but
that is a can of worms

>
> -------------
>
> In the introduction of *example 3* (mother and surrogate mother), I would
> state in words that the goal is to represent the fact that the senses
> associated with the two lexical entries are one more general than the
> other, and I would underly the use of *vartrans:category* to tell the
> specific type of relation.
>
> -------------
>
> In the section "Translation" I would give an example of cultural
> equivalent translation.
>
> -------------
>
> In *example 7*,
>
> the triple
>
> ":surrogate_mother_sense ontolex:reference <
> http://de.dbpedia.org/resource/Leihmutter>."
>
> has the wrong subject. The properties of the Translation resources have
> not been properly indented.
>
> -------------
>
> I know that the specification should not endorse any catalog of
> categories. However, an adopter should be informed about reasonable
> choices. Maybe we should give explicit pointers to LexInfo2, IsoCat, ...and
> so on. Not sure if we should give precise references. For instance, having
> said that there are direct translations and cultural equivalent ones, also
> give the names of the corresponding properties in common catalogs. In fact,
> these are only two possible cases, because each catalog may introduce
> whatever distinction it prefers.
>
I agree, is there such a thing? (Jorge?)

Also one more note for the agenda. There is an inconsistency in the model
in that we have a *property* between *lexical entries* for representing
translations called *translatableAs*, and a *reiation *between *lexical
senses* for representing translations called *Translation.* Shouldn't we
also have a *property* between *lexical senses* called *translation? *It
seems like we are inciting people to do the wrong thing (that is to use
translatableAs...)

Regards,
John

Best regards
>
> Manuel Fiorelli
>
>
> 2015-06-22 21:57 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano <
> cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>>    last week I have been working with Madrid (Lupe and Elena) on the
>> vartrans module. We regard the version online as the final version of the
>> module. We will discuss any final concerns on the the vartrans module this
>> Friday at our regular slot at 16:00 (CET).
>>
>> Please send me, as usual, any comments until Thursday night.
>>
>> See here access details for the telco:
>>
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Teleconference,_2015.6.26,_16-17_pm_CET
>>
>> Kind regards and talk to you soon...
>>
>> Philipp.
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
>> AG Semantic Computing
>> Exzellenzcluster für Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
>> Universität Bielefeld
>>
>> Tel: +49 521 106 12249
>> Fax: +49 521 106 6560
>> Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>>
>> Office CITEC-2.307
>> Universitätsstr. 21-25
>> 33615 Bielefeld, NRW
>> Germany
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Manuel Fiorelli
>