Theasurus FAQ questions.

Yes, I was thinking about putting together a full scale FAQ for the
Thesaurus Activity Site, and this would be a good question.  

Perhaps if we think up any good questions (and answers) we could post them
to public-esw-thes over the next month or so, and so build up an FAQ by
degrees.

Al.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: NJ Rogers, Learning and Research Technology
> [mailto:Nikki.Rogers@bristol.ac.uk]
> Sent: 28 January 2004 11:44
> To: Alistair Miles; Dave Beckett
> Subject: Wordnet Representations - RDF/XSD/OWL (fwd)
> 
> 
> Hi Al and Dave
> 
> This type of question (from below) will prob become a FAQ 
> which we should 
> cover in WP8:
> 
> "Would it be better to leave this as RDF or create an OWL ontology for
> the Wordnet metamodel?"
> 
> Nikki
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
> Date: 22 January 2004 14:41 -0700
> From: Michael Daconta <mike@daconta.net>
> To: www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Subject: Wordnet Representations - RDF/XSD/OWL
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> 
> 
> As part of a taxonomy framework, we will be linking 
> taxonomies lexically by
> requiring each term to be mapped to a WordNet synonym or synset.
> 
> As a start, I created an XSD schema and instance that follows 
> the striped
> syntax and is thus also parseable as RDF.
> 
> Here is a partial sample instance:
> 
> <wn:Word xmlns:rdf='http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'
> xmlns:wn='http://www.daconta.net/wn#' rdf:ID='dog'
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.daconta.net/wn# Word.xsd" >
> 
>             <wn:partsOfSpeech rdf:parseType='Collection'>
> 
>                <wn:PartOfSpeech wn:type='verb'>
> 
>                   <wn:concepts rdf:parseType='Collection'>
> 
>                         <wn:Concept rdf:ID='_1943890'>
> 
>                            <wn:definition>go after with the intent to
> catch; &quot;The policeman chased the mugger down the alley&quot;;
> &quot;the dog chased the rabbit&quot;</wn:definition>
> 
>                              <wn:relations  
> rdf:parseType='Collection'>
> 
>                                     <wn:Relation wn:type='hypernym'
> wn:tgt='_1942900'/>                              ...
> 
>                                     <wn:Relation wn:type='hyponym'
> wn:tgt='_1946245'/>
> 
>                              </wn:relations>
> 
>                               <wn:synonyms rdf:parseType='Collection'>
> 
>                                     <wn:Synonym 
> wn:lemma='chase_after'/>
> 
>                                     <wn:Synonym 
> wn:lemma='give_chase'/>
> 
>                          </wn:synonyms>
> 
>                           </wn:Concept>
> 
>              </wn:concepts>
> 
>             </wn:PartOfSpeech> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are interested in playing around with this, there is a 
> schema, test
> program and simple web service at
> 
> http://www.daconta.net/project_folder/WordnetMetamodel.html .
> 
> 
> 
> I have two questions for this group ...
> 
> 1. Would it be better to leave this as RDF or create an OWL 
> ontology for
> the Wordnet metamodel.
> 
> 2. How would you handle wordnet addressing?  In other words, 
> a link from a
> Topic to a Wordnet Concept (aka synset) or
> 
> Synonym.  Another aspect of this would be how closely wordnet 
> relations,
> map to XTM associations and OWL relations.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for any feedback,
> 
> 
> 
>  - Mike
> 
> ----------------------------
> 
> Michael C. Daconta
> 
> Chief Scientist, APG, McDonald Bradley, Inc.
> 
> www.daconta.net
> 
> 
> 
> ---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------
> NJ Rogers, Technical Researcher
> (Semantic Web Applications Developer)
> Institute for Learning and Research Technology (ILRT)
> Email:nikki.rogers@bristol.ac.uk
> Tel: +44(0)117 9287096 (Direct)
> Tel: +44(0)117 9287193 (Office)
>

Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2004 09:57:52 UTC