W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2015

Re: [Dbpedia-ontology] [Dbpedia-discussion] Advancing the DBpedia ontology

From: M. Aaron Bossert <mabossert@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 23:33:27 -0500
Cc: "<vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>" <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>, dbpedia-ontology <dbpedia-ontology@lists.sourceforge.net>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, SW-forum <semantic-web@w3.org>, "<dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>" <dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
Message-Id: <8213B185-58AF-4EB8-A0C4-C6E0F827619D@gmail.com>
To: John Flynn <jflynn12@verizon.net>
John,

You make a good point...but are we talking about a complete tear-down of the existing ontology?  I'm not necessarily opposed to that notion, by want to make sure that we are all in agreement as to the scope of work, as it were.

What would be the implications of a complete redo?  Would the benefit outweigh the impact to the community?  I would assume that there would be a ripple effect across all other LOD datasets that map to dbpedia, correct?  Or am I grossly overstating/misunderstanding how interconnected the ontology is? 

Vladimir, your thoughts?

Aaron

> On Feb 25, 2015, at 21:14, John Flynn <jflynn12@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> It seems the first level effort should be a requirements analysis for the
> Dbpedia ontology.
> - What is the level of expressiveness needed in the ontology language- 1st
> order logic, some level of descriptive logic, or a less expressive language?
> - Based on the above, what specific ontology implementation language should
> be used?
> - Should the Dbpedia ontology leverage an existing upper ontology, such as
> SUMO, DOLCE, etc?
> - Should the Dbpedia ontology architecture consist of a basic common core of
> concepts (possibly in addition to the concepts in a upper ontology) that are
> then extended by additional domain ontologies?
> - How will the Dbpedia ontology be managed?
> - What are the hosting requirements for access loads on the ontology? How
> many simultaneous users?
> 
> This is only a cursory cut at Dbpedia ontology requirement issues. But, it
> seems the community needs to come to grips with this issue before
> implementing specific changes to the existing ontology.
> 
> John Flynn
> http://semanticsimulations.com   
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. Aaron Bossert [mailto:mabossert@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:13 AM
> To: <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
> Cc: dbpedia-ontology; Linked Data community; SW-forum;
> <dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Subject: Re: [Dbpedia-ontology] [Dbpedia-discussion] Advancing the DBpedia
> ontology
> 
> Vladimir,
> 
> I'm thinking of trying to do some stats on the existing ontology and the
> mappings to see where there is room for improvement.  I'm tied up this week
> with a couple deadlines that I seem to moving towards at greater than light
> speed, though my progress is not.
> 
> As soon as I get the rough cut done, I'll share the results with you and
> maybe we can discuss paths forward?
> 
> I'm with you on the 30% error rate...that doesn't help anyone.
> 
> Aaron
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 26 February 2015 04:34:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:57 UTC