Re: [all] Call for consensus on disambiguation - feedback integrated [ACTION-181]

Hi Sebastian, all,

August is taking its tribute ... I am wondering if there any thoughts on
Sebastian's mail below. It seems that some of the proposed ITS attributes
are not needed, but I don't have the competence to evaluate this. Thoughts
from others?  Sebastian, could you confirm that the output mentioned in
this other thread

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Aug/0168.html

is correct for NIF? I then would create a test case for our test suite, see

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-tests/2012Aug/0003.html

Thanks,

Felix

Am Donnerstag, 9. August 2012 schrieb Sebastian Hellmann :

> Hi Felix,
> below mostly my opinion on this. Nothing, wrong with including these
> properties, but they might not make sense in RDF. If you think, that there
> are people who would really use these properties in RDF, then go ahead and
> include them. Personally, *I* wouldn't know for what *I* could use them.
> More comments inline.
>
> Am 09.08.2012 15:20, schrieb Felix Sasaki:
>
>> its:entityTypeSourceRef
>>
> I really do not find this property helpful.
> Do you see any sense in saying that http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>is from
> http://dbpedia.org ? In the linked data world http://dbpedia.org/resource/
> **Dublin <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin> comes from
> http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>. So you might specify a way to convert that to ITS, but we might not need
> an RDF property for this.
>
>  its:disambigType
>> "(http://www.w3.org/2005/11/**its/lexicalConcept|<http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/lexicalConcept%7C>
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/**ontologyConcept|http://www.w3.**
>> org/2005/11/its/<http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/ontologyConcept%7Chttp://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/>
>> entity)"
>>
> I am unsure about this one.
>
>  its:entityTypeRef
>>
> is already rdf:type, so it would be a duplicate to have its:entityTypeRef
> in RDF. For http://dbpedia.org/resource/**Dublin<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>its:entityTypeRef would be one of:
> http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**PopulatedPlace<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/PopulatedPlace>
> http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**Settlement<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Settlement>
> http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**PopulatedPlace<http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/PopulatedPlace>
> http://dbpedia.org/ontology/**Place <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Place>
> http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**Village <http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/Village>
> http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/**Location_Underspecified<http://umbel.org/umbel/rc/Location_Underspecified>
> http://schema.org/Place
> http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#**Thing<http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing>
> http://www.opengis.net/gml/_**Feature<http://www.opengis.net/gml/_Feature>
> +
> http:/nerd.eurecom.fr/**ontology#Place<http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Place>
>
> If you have a Problem with this plurality. Then it might be good to
> include an annotation property  its:preferedEntityTypeRef
> So the data is there already in RDF, the problem is rather to find a way
> to convert it back to ITS.
>
> All the best,
> Sebastian
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Felix
>
> 2012/8/9 Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
>
>  Thanks for this, Tadej, looks good. There is just one comment I don't see
> reflected:
>
> 7) A question on the data category in general and the "rules" element:
> does it make sense to make some attributes mandatory? Currently, this would
> be valid:
> <its:disambiguation selector="/text/body/p[@id='**dublin']/>
>
>
> It seems that still all metadata items / attributes are optional. Is there
> a way to be more specific about what must or must not appear together, what
> is optional etc?
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
>
> 2012/8/9 Tadej Stajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si>
>
>    Hi,
>   thanks for the tips. I covered them, and I agree towards removing the
> local XPath, since it has very limited use. Here is another incorporating
> all these comments.
> -- Tadej
>
> On 8/3/2012 1:07 PM, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
> Hi Tadej, all,
>
>   thanks a lot for this. Just a few comments / questions:
>
>   1) About "The information applies to the textual content of the
> element, including child elements and attributes.": wouldn't it make more
> sense to say that this applies to only the content of the element? E.g. if
> you annotate the "span" element in
>
>   <p>I have seen <span id="timbl"><span class="firstame">Tim</span> <span
> class="lastname">Berners-Lee</**span></span> in the olympics opening
> ceremony</p>
>
>   You want to express disambiguation information about the "span" element
> with the "id" attribute, but not about the "id" attribute or the nested
> span elements. So inheritance probably should be: "There is no
> inheritance". What do you think?
>
>
>   2) About "The Entity data category can be expressed with global rules,
> or locally on an individual element.": This should probably be "The
> Disambiguation data category can be expressed with global rules, or locally
> on an individual element."
>
>   3) About local markup: for other data categories, we don't have the
> "pointer" attributes as local markup, since processing of XPath in local
> markup can be very expensive. So I would propose to drop the local pointer
> attributes here too.
>
>   4) In the table at the end, "Global pointing to existing information"
> should be "yes" I think.
>
>   5) This selector
> <its:disambiguation selector="/text/body/p/#**dublin" ...
> In XPath should be
> <its:disambiguation selector="/text/body/p[@id='**dublin']
>
>   6) To follow the conventions from other data categories, the
> "its:disambiguation" element should probably be called
> "its:disambiguationRule".
>
>   7) A question on the data category in general and the "rules" element:
> does it make sense to make some attributes mandatory? Currently, this would
> be valid:
> <its:disambiguation selector="/text/body/p[@id='**dublin']/>
>
>   8) A question to the others in this thread (Guiseppe, Pablo, Raphael,
> Sebastian): is this a representation that makes sense to you and that your
> tools could produce?
>
>   9) A question to the MT guys: is the way "entity and disambiguation"
> information is represented here useful for you?
>
>   Best,
>
>   Felix
>
> 2012/8/3 Tadej Štajner <tadej.stajner@ijs.si>
>
>  Hi,
> I incorporated some comments that 'entity' was still conflated from
> several distinct things in the data category proposal. Now, we distinguish
> between disambiguation of word sense, ontology concept and entity instance.
> Following that, it seems that 'Disambiguation' was the better name for the
> data category.
>
> Thanks for everyone's input!
>
> -- Tadej
>
> On 02. 08. 2012 17:26, Tadej Štajner wrote:
>
>  Apologies -- wrong link on the previous mail. This is the relevant one:
> http://www.w3.org/**International/multilingualweb/**lt/track/actions/181<http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/181>
> -- Tadej
>
> On 02. 08. 2012 17:22, Tadej Štajner wrote:
>
> Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
> Events:
>   * http://sabre2012.infai.org/**mlode <http://sabre2012.infai.org/mlode>(Leipzig, Sept. 23-24-25, 2012)
>   * http://wole2012.eurecom.fr (*Deadline: July 31st 2012*)
> Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://dbpedia.org
> Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-**leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann<http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann>
> Research Group: http://aksw.org
>
>

-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow