Re: [bpmlod] Guidelines for converting BabelNet as Linguistic Linked Data

Philipp, very nice comments, thank you very much!
Whenever possible, we explained the issue a little better. In general we
have already started addressing some of the points you highlighted and the
next version of the document will include them too!

Regards,
Tiziano


2014-05-29 15:57 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
:

>  Dear Tiziano, all,
>
> thanks for sending along this nice description. I reviewed it carefully;
> some comments here:
>
> 1) You do not say anything about how the conversion is implemented
> technically, how and where the original data is stored etc. It would be
> useful I think to have half a page or so describing how you have
> implemented the conversion.
>
> 2) Choice of URIs: There is very little rationale for how you decided to
> engineer the URIs, i.e. description of why you adopted the URI naming
> scheme. A few notes on this for every entity would be good I think.
>
> 3) "Information about translation confidence (was it humanly or
> automatically produced? if automatic, with what confidence score?) and
> translation provenance (what text(s) does the translation come from? who
> translated and with what tool?). " -> not clear what the issue here is?
> That the information can not be represented with the translation relation?
> It would be good to make the issue explicit.
>
> 4) "Another issue concerns whether the relation lexinfo:translation is
> essential or not: every sense in a language within a BabelSynset is, in
> fact, a translation of any other sense in another language, so that this
> information could actually be derived (problem of redundancy). However,
> having data linked one to each other could also be a benefit, since the
> information is explicit in the resource. " => This point is not clear to
> me? Are you discussing if you could do without a translation relation? So
> how do you represent translation relations without any translation
> property? Sorry, this point is not clear to me.
>
> 5) "If this is true that some terms in the Dublin Core vocabular,
> according to http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-prov-dc-20130312/, can be
> mapped in a one-to-one correspondence to terms in the PROV-O (e.g.,
> dc:provenance can be mapped to the PROV-O term prov:has_provenance), this
> is unfortunately not always the case (e.g., dc:license has no direct
> corresponding term in the PROV-O)." -> sentence seems broken, at least
> vocabular should be "vocabulary"; the sentence is not clear in general.
>
>
> Finally, it would be good to end the text with "Recommendations" saying
> what best practices we recommend for somebody who wants to tansform a
> similar resource to Linked Data. Can we give a list of Recommended
> Practices and "Not Recommended Practices" i.e. DOs and DONTs. That would be
> very useful I think.
>
> We could have this DOs and DONTs for all types of resources.
>
>
>  Very nice work in general!
>
>  Best regards,
>
>
> Philipp.
>
>
> Am 22.05.14 10:12, schrieb Tiziano Flati:
>
> Dear all,
>
>  we have compiled a first draft of guidelines for the conversion of
> BabelNet as Linguistic Linked Data. The initial draft is here<https://docs.google.com/document/d/184C_AjY7_PYBSc8SnAFghGLyTo1v312N34dsP9QZokI/edit#>
> .
>
>  We can probably integrate this into the BPMLOD community report both as
> a separate document and in the form of all our resource-dependent and
> independent details/comments.
> Any feedback and comment is also very appreciated and will help us
> improving the draft.
>
>  Best regards,
> Tiziano Flati and Roberto Navigli
>
>
>
> --
>
> Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
>
> Phone: +49 521 106 12249
> Fax: +49 521 106 12412
> Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>
> Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
> Raum 2.307
> Universität Bielefeld
> Inspiration 1
> 33619 Bielefeld
>
>