W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 1999

Re: WordNet in RDF/XML: 50,000+ RDF class vocabulary...

From: Thomas Bandholtz <thomas@sema.de>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 15:10:28 +0100
Message-ID: <015f01bf3ff3$a73dc7f0$ea46a8c0@sema.de>
To: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>, "Sergey Melnik" <melnik@DB.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, <wordnet@princeton.edu>
Sounds very interesting.

We use RDF with environmental terminology in www.gein.de in Germany. Last
week we had a workshop, starting the development of an "Environmental Markup
Language" which will be RDF + eml-namespace + vocabulary. There is a
12-lingual environmental thesaurus named GEMET, maintained by the European
Environmental Agency. We want to convert this thesaurus into the form of a
topic map (see http://www.topic-maps.com/lit/iso13250/iso13250-1999-fcd.htm
or www.topic-maps.de). I think topic maps are a good structure for
vocabularies in the semantic web.

Thomas Bandholtz
-  Sema Group GmbH -
Project Manager Environmental Information Systems
Kaltenbornweg 3
D50679 Cologne
GERMANY
xx49 221 8299 264
thomas@sema.de



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
An: Sergey Melnik <melnik@DB.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>; <wordnet@princeton.edu>
Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Dezember 1999 05:22
Betreff: Re: WordNet in RDF/XML: 50,000+ RDF class vocabulary...


> On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Sergey Melnik wrote:
> > Nice demo. Given the wealth of possible application scenarious, it'd be
> > great to have an RDF dump of WordNet (a la Open Directory) that uses
> > some "standard" RDF interpretation in a fixed namespace. Then people can
> > start talking about the same "concepts".
>
> I agree. As soon as we can give a Web identifier to the WordNet vocabulary
> (or, specifically, the v1.6 version?) people can rush off and start using
> it for Web annotations, content classification/categorisation,
> accessibility tools etc. While any arbitrary URI would in principle allow
> for this as long as folks agree, practicality and politeness both suggest
> that the web identifier for WordNet is something that the Princeton
> WordNet team should probably specify or bless.
>
> So, that's one reason I copied wordnet@princeton.edu in on my msg. My
> belief is that we know enough now to suggest how to deploy a
> WordNet-in-RDF namespace, and that we could have a WordNet RDF vocabulary
> (for nouns at least) up and running for semantic web applications fairly
> quickly.
>
> I'm particularly interested to hear from anyone with contradictory views,
> or with more experience of the WordNet vocabulary. WordNet proved easy to
> mine for a set of RDF classes; I'm wondering whether there is a
> mechanisable mapping from other parts of the WordNet to RDF
> properties/relations too...
>
> So - if anyone from wordnet@princeton is listening, you've been copied in
> to a thread on the W3C RDF Interest Group [1]. The suggestion is that an
> officially blessed WordNet 'namespace' URI (ie. a Web identifier such as a
> URL or URN) would allow us to use WordNet concepts with the RDF [2]
> information model for Web content classification and categorisation.
>
> The URI could be something like http://cogsci.princeton.edu/rdf/wn/ or
> http://rdf.cogsci.princeton.edu/wn16/. Ideally those identifiers would
> allow applications to connect to datadumps of WordNet using XML/RDF, but
> the important thing for the use of WordNet with XML/RDF is that we agree
> on a common identifier for the WordNet vocabulary.
>
> Dan
>
> ps. I don't believe a separate RDF dump of wordnet is needed. Instead we
> could use just a few line perl script to autoconvert the Prolog dumps of
> WordNet that are already available. Similarly for an interactive version,
> a short Perl script can wrap the commandline query interface.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/RDF/Interest/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/RDF/
>
Received on Monday, 6 December 1999 09:12:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:42 GMT