W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > November 2009

Re: Using DBpedia resources as skos:Concepts?

From: Frederick Giasson <fred@fgiasson.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 08:24:52 -0500
To: Ross Singer <rossfsinger@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Message-id: <4AF180A4.5070104@fgiasson.com>
Hi Ross!

Exactly. It is a good example of the usage of umbel:linksEntity. so, it 
links a concept to a related (in terms of aboutness) individual.

So, with these two properties, we have the usecases for: "Concept -> 
Individual" and "Individual -> Concept"

Additionally, you have other properties that handle other usecases such as:

(1) umbel:isLike (Individual -> Individual). You can also reify a 
likelihood weight by reifying the umbel:withLikelihood property)
(2) umbel:isAligned and umbel:linksConcept (Class -> SubjectConcept and 
SubjectConcept -> Class ; and you can reify an alignement weight with 
the umbel:isAligned property).

So, as you cited bellow, the goal is to assert "aboutness and 
likelihood" relationship between: individuals, classes and subject concepts.

So, umbel has two major components: (1) a graph of subject concepts (its 
usage is discussed at length in the documentation) and (2) an ontology 
that relates inviduals and classes to subject concepts (usecases 
discussed in this thread).


A new version of the subject concepts framework will be released soon 


Take care,

> Is this the sort of scenario where umbel comes into play?  If so, I
> might start understanding what exactly umbel is.
> Given what I can parse from the documentation (hairnet over the
> basketball and everything) is that:
> <http://mydataset/433256>
>   a skosConcept;
>   umbel:linksEntity <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Michelle_Obama>;
> might work.  The definition of linksEntity is this:
> Property name:  umbel:linksEntity
> Description:  Check the definition of umbel:isAbout for the definition
> of this property; linksEntity is the inverse property of isAbout.
> Domain:  umbel:SubjectConcept
> Range: owl:Thing
> Inverse-of: umbel:isAbout
> with umbel:isAbout being:
> Property name:  umbel:isAbout
> Description:  The property umbel:isAbout is used to assert the
> relation between a named entity (individual) and a subject concept
> class. umbel:isAbout relates the named entity (individual) to the
> class through the basis of its subject matter. The relation
> acknowledges that the scope of the class can not be determined solely
> by the aggregation or extent of its associated individual entity
> members, and that the nature of the subject concept class may not
> alone bound or define the individual entity.
> Named entities may be related with multiple subject concept classes.
> The domain of umbel:isAbout defines its class description as the class
> of all individuals (owl:Thing) and its range as the class of subject
> concepts (umbel:SubjectConcept), thereby bounding the property's
> proper semantics of associating individuals to their related subject
> concept class(es).
> This property is therefore used to create a topical assertion between
> an individual and a subject concept.
> Domain: owl:Thing
> Range: umbel:SubjectConcept
> an umbel:SubjectConcept is a subclass of a skos:Concept.
> If this -is- how that's supposed to work, it seems like a work around
> the "aboutness" vs. "isness" issue.
> -Ross.
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I want to get some broader feedback and opinion on this question.
>> There is a use case where an external dataset is modelled in SKOS, and we
>> want to map it to DBpedia. Something like:
>> <http://mydataset/433256>
>>    a skos:Concept;
>>    owl:sameAs <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Michelle_Obama>;
>>    .
>> I've used owl:sameAs here. Now the problem is that my:433256 is a
>> skos:Concept, while dbp:Michelle_Obama is a foaf:Person. I wonder wether
>> that's a problem. I can't see any immediate contradiction arising from that,
>> but I'm uncertain.
>> Another option would be to use skos:closeMatch or skos:exactMatch, but these
>> are intended for use between skos:Concepts, while I'm trying to connect a
>> skos:Concept to a foaf:Person.
>> The main question, I guess, is wether people in the DBpedia project would
>> consider the assertion
>>    <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Michelle_Obama> a skos:Concept .
>> to be acceptable or erroneous, or wether SKOS folks tell me that
>> skos:Concept is obviously disjoint from foaf:Person.
>> I know that this is a complex issue, so I'm not really looking for a "right"
>> or "wrong" answer. I'm more interested in getting all the pros and cons and
>> pitfalls and caveats on the table, so please, if you have any opinion on the
>> issue, I want to hear it.
>> I'm cc'ing Pat Hayes, because he said he's interested in that kind of
>> question.
>> All the best and thanks for your time,
>> Richard
>> --
>> Linked Data Technologist  Linked Data Research Centre
>> Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI), NUI Galway, Ireland
>> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
>> skype:richard.cyganiak
>> tel:+353-91-49-5711
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2009 13:23:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:45:59 UTC