W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > June 2004

RE: [WNET] RDFS for WordNet datamodel

From: McBride, Brian <brian.mcbride@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:23:55 +0100
Message-ID: <E864E95CB35C1C46B72FEA0626A2E808026A12E0@0-mail-br1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Aldo Gangemi <gangemi@loa-cnr.it>, "McBride, Brian" <brian.mcbride@hp.com>, "'Aldo Gangemi'" <a.gangemi@istc.cnr.it>, "'Dan Brickley'" <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: "'SWBPD list'" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

Hi Aldo, 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aldo Gangemi [mailto:gangemi@loa-cnr.it] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 8:56 AM
> To: McBride, Brian; 'Aldo Gangemi'; 'Dan Brickley'
> Cc: 'SWBPD list'
> Subject: [WNET] RDFS for WordNet datamodel
> 
> Hi wnetters,
> 
> please have a look at a revised version of the RDFS for Wordnet 
> datamodel written by Brian last Saturday:
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Jun/0019.html

Cool.  Ralph has an action to create a subdirectory for Wordnet in best
practices web space.  I suggested that; I hope that's ok with you.  My
intent was thet we can get the docs in CVS and maintain them there.  This
gives us a stable URL to refer to the latest version, which I suggest is a
good thing.

Would you like me to act as editor of these documents or would you prefer
someone else (yourself, Guus, ?) to do that?

> 
> I have added some missing properties, corrected various typos and 
> syntax, and commented a bit the decision to include "word senses" in 
> the domain of WNET RDFS.
> 
> In fact, in principle we don't need a such thing like "word senses", 
> because we already have words and synsets (the senses for sets of 
> words). But being able to annotate documents with resources linked 
> both to exactly one sense and to exactly one word seems an advantage.

Ok, I'm new to WordNet so may have misunderstood.

Can you explain how relations like antonym and seeAlso work - should they be
between words?

I'll state my understanding of the terminology for folks to correct.

Word - a symbol, usually a sequence of characters, e.g. "dog".

WordSense - a word used in a particular sense, e.g. (dog meaning follow).
Words may have multiple senses.

SynSet - a collection of WordSenses with similar meaning.

From WordNet

[[
 ant(synset_id,w_num,synset_id,w_num).

    The ant operator specifies antonymous word s. This is a lexical relation
that holds for all syntactic categories. For each antonymous pair, both
relations are listed (ie. each synset_id,w_num pair is both a source and
target word.) 
]]

I took that to mean that the antonym relation is between word senses, not
between words.  If we make it between words, we lose information represented
in WordNet.

Another question is whether we need a resource node in the graph to
represent a word, or whether we can just use literals.  If I recall
correctly, my colleague inserted a resource so that he could model the
probablility that a particular word was used in a particular sense.  I think
he did this by creating a tertiary relation (word, wordsense, p) where p is
the probability that a the word is used in that sense.  There may be a
simpler way to do that, e.g. just hanging a single property of a wordsense
resource.

Another issue here is language.  Is the French word "chat" the same word as
the English word "chat".  We could still use literals to represent language,
but, if we want to use XML literals, then we'd have to wrap the literal in
an exlicit tag, e.g. "<word xml:lang="en">chat</word>" rather than just
"chat".  It might be simpler just to hang a langauge property off the Word
resource.

Brian
Received on Friday, 11 June 2004 11:25:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:39 UTC