W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > January 2015

Re: [Dbpedia-discussion] Advancing the DBpedia ontology

From: Dimitris Kontokostas <jimkont@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:00:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+u4+a3yvpic6+GmoY9ig8BqhzP5jhkO-Lkxer-EVOiyauzadg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Alexiev <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
Cc: "dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net" <dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Vladimir has a good point and is one of the very active contributors lately.
Of course we do not plan to keep the mappings in isolation from the
ontology, there should always be a feedback loop.

The problem we had so far was that the mappings drove the ontology design
and if someone couldn't easily find a dbo property/class to map an infobox
she created a new one.
What we want now is the exact opposite, the ontology design should come
first.

What we did not yet announce is that we are already building some tools
that will ease the feedback from the ontology to the mappings wiki and
hopefully overall improve the data quality of DBpedia.

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Vladimir Alexiev <
vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com> wrote:

> > http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php/DBpedia_Ontology_Committee
>
> I've enlarged the goals as follows:
> - set the future directions of the DBpedia ontology
> - set best practices for mapping
> - engage the community in meaningful discussions, eg see
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Authority_control
> - formulate and execute focused investigations that lead to best
> practices, eg What's in a Name (this page lists 68!! "name" properties we
> currntly got), how to map Parent Places, etc
> - improve the ontology and mapping editing workflow
>
> Of course, each of these goals is up for discussion.
> But I strongly feel that working on the ontology in isolation from the
> mappings will not be productive.
>
> IMHO the major problems are not with the ontology itself, but more in the
> mappings.
> I've shared many weird and scary things, most are on
> https://github.com/dbpedia/mappings-tracker/issues?q= .
>
> E.g. how many defects can you find here?
> http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php/Mapping_el:Quote_box
> No peeking in the Discussion tab :-)
>
> Another quick quiz:
> - what is vicePresident in DBO? What should it be a subproperty of?
> - why the VicePresident class should be deleted?
> - what's wrong with this mapping:
>
> http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php?title=Mapping_pl:Polityk_infobox&action=edit
>
> MAB> shared memory supercomputer and a large Hadoop appliance if anyone is
> interested
> > in applying some new techniques for modeling the ontology.  I work for
> Cray.
>
> Oh wow!
> I think what we need is a bunch of editors who know a bit about RDF, think
> clearly, and can spend time on editorial discussions and gardening.
> Supercomputer powers won't help here (but superhuman powers might :-)
>
> DK> DBpedia was a completely user-driven ontology and we plan to keep it
> that way.
> > Now we will only set some editing workflow rules that will ensure a
> basic level of quality.
>
> And hopefully educate the editors through discussions and gardening.
> Thus far there's been very little discussion on the mapping wiki, which is
> the major problem..
>
> In fact this thread proves it: why aren't we discussing the goals of that
> committee on the wiki ?
>
> http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:DBpedia_Ontology_Committee&action=edit&redlink=1
>
> --
>
> PFPS> Is there going to be the possibility of at least listening in
> remotely?
>
> ** Even if not: Peter, your contributions will be much appreciated! Even a
> quick diagnosis like this
>
> http://sourceforge.net/p/dbpedia/mailman/dbpedia-discussion/thread/BF52E5F8-889B-40A4-92DD-CF82C20BAEEF%40nuance.com/#msg32207963
> can drive a number of investigations by industrious editors.
>
> PFPS> As well I would like to know what expressive power is being
> considered for the ontology language.
> > For example, will disjointness axioms be allowed, or local ranges, or
> constraints?
>
> IMHO we need to discuss what these constructs will be used for.
> E.g. Wikidata has a bunch of Constraint Violation reports.
> E.g. see here the report for ULAN id:
>
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P245
> - Charles Bridges (Q5075775) and Charles Bridges (Q18641990) probably need
> to be merged in Wikidata.
> - ULAN recors 500115493, 500000031 probably need to be merged in ULAN,
>   if my surmising that Albrecht Dürer = Master of the Martyrdom of the Ten
> Thousand is right.
>
> We should also compare against the capabilities of the extraction
> framework.
> E.g. rdfs:range provides very useful hints, but they can't yet be used by
> the extraction framework
> (since it can't map back from cooked to raw props to take them into
> account). Which leads to e.g.
> - [[1940]] and [[13 май]] and [[Switzerland]] extracted as
> firstAccentPerson
> - 42.697556 getting truncated to 42.8 before being converted to geo:lat
> for https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/София
> - Places etc extracted as parents:
>   select {?x dbpedia-owl:parent ?y filter not exists {?y a
> dbpedia-owl:Person}}
>
> NT> How will it relate to other ontologies, taxonomies and schemas?
>
> Basic things like DC, DCT, FOAF, BIBO should be used more than currently
> (but domain & range carefully checked).
>
> > Also, will it relate to Wikidata, Wikipedia, schema.org, Facebook OG,
> etc.
>
> Bigger mappings to external ontologies should appear in some future, but
> this is not so simple.
> E.g. the current DBO<->Schema class mapping doesn't account for the
> different shape of the two hierarchies, with disastrous results.
>
> MB> How will you address the problem that these changes could break
> existing applications?
> > Will there be mappings from old to new?
> > Maybe an extended dump with the consequences of those mappings realized
> as extra triples?
>
> These are very relevant questions, so changes should not be done
> willy-nilly.
>
> But for many broken cases, I feel we shouldn't be hand-bound by
> considerations of "backward compatibility". E.g.
>
> - if you have a fr.dbpedia app and use the prop path
>    takePlace/sharingOut
> to reach the parent of a place, see
> https://github.com/dbpedia/mappings-tracker/issues/29,
> this will break when we replace it with isPartOf (as used in many other
> maps).
>
> - if you have a bg.dbpedia app and use this to find females
>   dbo:sex "a"  # that's a cyrillic "a"
> this will break since we replaced it with dbo:gender dbr:Female
>
> But is this good enough reason to keep emitting the old broken data?
>
> Cheers!
> --
> Vladimir Alexiev, PhD, PMP
> Lead, Data and Ontology Management Group
> Ontotext Corp, www.ontotext.com
> Sirma Group Holding, www.sirma.com
> Email: vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com, skype:valexiev1
> Mobile: +359 888 568 132, SMS: 359888568132@sms.mtel.net
> Landline: +359 (988) 106 084, Fax: +359 (2) 975 3226
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
> GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn.
> Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
> Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet
> _______________________________________________
> Dbpedia-discussion mailing list
> Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
>



-- 
Kontokostas Dimitris
Received on Monday, 26 January 2015 08:01:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:22:18 UTC