Re: agenda+ referencing ontology (Re: ISSUE-119: ITS RDF Ontology creation [MLW-LT Standard Draft])

Hi Sebastian, Dave, all,

thanks a lot for the explanations, Sebastian.

I changed taClassRef to be an annotation property, see
http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf-content/its-rdf.rdf
otherwise I left the RDF/XML as is, that is it uses owl:ObjectProperty 
in the places discussed.

Dave, does
http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf-content/its-rdf.rdf
work for you? I then would covert it to turtle and put it on the wiki as 
well.

Best,

Felix

Am 18.04.13 23:41, schrieb Sebastian Hellmann:
> Hi Dave,
> OWL works quite funny, but a little bit unintuitive. Let's see an 
> example based on http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_homepage
> *Note* I attached a small list of changes, which should be made at the 
> end, please don't overlook ;)
> Another small note: "rdfs:property" -> "rdf:Property"
>
> In the example, we will always consider the following triple, which 
> you can find on http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel , but 
> exchange the schema.
> The triple is:
>
> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel>  foaf:homepage <http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/> .
>
> 1. With xsd:anyURI in the schema:
> foaf:homepage rdf:type rdf:Property ;
>      rdfs:range xsd:anyURI .
> The triple would say, that Angela's homepage is a 41 character long URI:
> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel>  foaf:homepage "http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/" .
> I am absolutely not sure how datatypes are validated by parsers and 
> how parser will react to malformed URIs . Not sure, if they enforce 
> anything.  I have also never seen this variant anywhere in use.
>
> inferred triples:
> # none
>
>
> 2. With rdfs:Resource:
> foaf:homepage rdf:type rdf:Property ;
>      rdfs:range rdfs:Resource  .
> The object *must* be valid URI according to the RDF spec and also
> The class resource, everything.
> according to http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Resource
> Also you should use <> again:
> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel>  foaf:homepage <http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/> .
>
> 3.  with owl:ObjectProperty:
> foaf:homepage rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty .
> Also the object *must* be  a valid URI, otherwise the parser will give 
> a warning.
> Being an ObjectProperty *implies* that 
> <http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/> is an owl:Thing , which is 
> "The class of OWL individuals.", a rather technical definition. This 
> could be anything, including a web site or homepage. Not that this is 
> not a *requirement*, but it will be *inferred*, if needed.
>
> Inferred:
> <http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/>  rdf:type owl:Thing .
>
> 4. Full definition from http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage
>
> <rdf:Property rdf:about="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage"  
> vs:term_status="stable" rdfs:label="homepage" rdfs:comment="A homepage
> for some thing.">
>      <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ObjectProperty"/>
>      <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/page"/>
>      <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/isPrimaryTopicOf"/>
>      <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#InverseFunctionalProperty"/>
>      <!--  previously: rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent"  -->
>      <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing"/>
>      <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Document"/>
>      <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"/>
>    </rdf:Property>
>
> implicit triples expanded:
>
> ## by rdfs:domain (actually redundant, b)
> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel>  rdf:type owl:Thing .
> # previously (old rdf:sdomain)
> #<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel>  rdf:type foaf:Agent .
>
> ## by rdfs:range
> <http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/>  rdf:type owl:Thing .
> <http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/>  rdf:type foaf:Document .
>
> ## by superproperties:
> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel>  foaf:page<http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/>  .
> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Angela_Merkel>  foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf<http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BK/EN/>  .
>
> ### some more are omitted
>
> This goes very much down to the basics and I really hope that I got 
> everything correct.
>
>
> Some notes, which hopefully do not get overead
>
> 1. taClassRef should be an annotation property
> There is one more small change, which I also used for some of the NIF 
> properties and was requested by Stanbol.
> <http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf#taClassRef>  rdf:type owl:AnnotationProperty .
> Whenever the Object is supposed to be an owl:Class, it can not per 
> definition be an owl:Thing . Making taClassRef an AnnotationProperty 
> makes all reasoners ignore it and nothing will be inferred.
>
> 2. Actually, you might want to consider to add rdfs:label and 
> rdfs:comment and to add language tags to  "comments"@en and translate 
> them to several language. (this is fine tuning however)
> 3. other ontologies use rdfs:isDefinedBy , I find this rather strange 
> with ontologies that use the  '#'
> <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#AllDifferent> rdfs:isDefinedBy 
> <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
> It is kind of self-explanatory.
>
> All the best,
> Sebastian
>
>
>
>
>
> Am 17.04.2013 17:14, schrieb Dave Lewis:
>> Felix, Sebastian,
>>
>> I'm not sure I follow the reasoning behind this change. I've tried to 
>> outline my concerns below so it would be great if you could clarify 
>> this for us.
>>
>> If we assume that any instances following this ontology originally 
>> are converted from an XML or HTML file with ITS annotation, then 
>> there is no guarantee that the URIs point to an OWL instance - we 
>> don't make any such restrictions in the spec. They could just point 
>> to a web page or a UUID or what ever else makes sense in the context 
>> of the original file.
>>
>> My understanding of owl:ObjectProperty however is that it must point 
>> to an OWL instance, i.e. something that is an instance of an 
>> owl:Thing, so using the ontology declaration:
>>
>> itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef
>>     a owl:ObjectProperty .
>>
>> would not actually be true in valid ITS cases where the URI referred 
>> to a resource that is not an OWL instance.
>>
>> That was my motivation for specifying this as just:
>> :taAnnotatorsRef rdf:type rdfs:property;
>>      rdfs:range xsd:anyURI .
>> since it doesn't preclude either of the owl:DatatypeProperty or the 
>> owl:ObjectProperty options. I see this as necessary since we won't 
>> know which one is appropriate without actually de-referencing the 
>> URI. Perhaps such a check could be a final optional step in the 
>> ITS-NIF mapping - but its more of an optimisation I think?
>>
>> cheers,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 17/04/2013 14:22, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>>> Thanks, Sebastian. Is now updated at
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf-content/its-rdf.rdf
>>> Dave, can you check whether this is ok, and if yes, update
>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/ITS-RDF_mapping
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Felix
>>>
>>> Am 17.04.13 14:54, schrieb Sebastian Hellmann:
>>>> Hi Felix,
>>>> I had another look at the new version. There is a small, but 
>>>> important difference between DatatypeProperties and xsd:anyURI, see 
>>>> here: 
>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Jul/0395.html 
>>>> (see Axel Polleres answer)
>>>>
>>>> In your case however you want to refer to the the rdf:resources, so 
>>>> anything with xsd:anyURI should be owl:ObjectProperty with no 
>>>> rdfs:range:
>>>> itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef
>>>>     a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
>>>>     rdfs:range xsd:anyURI .
>>>>
>>>> should be:
>>>>
>>>> itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef
>>>>     a owl:ObjectProperty .
>>>>
>>>> This implies per definition, that the Object has to be an 
>>>> rdf:resource and a valid URI. I am not sure, whether xsd:anyURI 
>>>> covers IRI's as well, but owl:ObjectProperty should be compatible 
>>>> IIRC.
>>>>
>>>> All the best,
>>>> Sebastian
>>>>
>>>> Am 17.04.2013 12:31, schrieb Felix Sasaki:
>>>>> P.S. again: with feedback from Sebastian (thanks a lot for that!), 
>>>>> I made an update to the ontology. This doesn't influence the 
>>>>> examples below (at Dave: we need to update the wiki then, if you 
>>>>> agree).
>>>>>
>>>>> - Felix
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 17.04.13 10:36, schrieb Felix Sasaki:
>>>>>> Hi Phil,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 17.04.13 09:31, schrieb Phil Ritchie:
>>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does NIF have wider adoption than RDF?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NIF is an RDF based format. That is, the relation betwen NIF and 
>>>>>> RDF is like between XML and XHTML, or XML and XLIFF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We use NIF in ITS2 to connect ITS information in markup (XML, 
>>>>>> HTML5) with an RDF representation. See
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#conversion-to-nif
>>>>>> and a full example input HTML5 at
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#EX-HTML-whitespace-normalization
>>>>>> RDF output using NIF and the ITS2 ontology at
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/examples/nif/EX-nif-conversion-output.xml
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The purpose of the ITS2 ontology is not to relate the RDF 
>>>>>> representation to XML/RDF - NIF does that -, but to identify the 
>>>>>> ITS2 properties in an RDF manner, that is with RDF predicates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is an interconnection between NIF and the ITS ontology. See 
>>>>>> this example generated from a part of
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/examples/nif/EX-nif-conversion-output.xml
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=11,17> nif:anchorOf 
>>>>>> "Dublin";
>>>>>>     nif:referenceContext 
>>>>>> <http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=0,29>;
>>>>>>     a nif:RFC5147String;
>>>>>>     itsrdf:taIdentRef <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>;
>>>>>>     itsrdf:translate "no";
>>>>>>     itsrdf:withinText "yes".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This statement
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=11,17> nif:anchorOf 
>>>>>> "Dublin".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Relates the HTML5 document with the RDF representation. To ancor 
>>>>>> this relation in the NIF RDF vocabulary we have this statement
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=11,17> a nif:RFC5147String.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The actual ITS ontology statements are these three. They have the 
>>>>>> same subject as the NIF statements above. That creates the 
>>>>>> forehand mentioned relation between NIF and ITS2.
>>>>>> <http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=11,17> itsrdf:taIdentRef 
>>>>>> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin>.
>>>>>> <http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=11,17> itsrdf:translate 
>>>>>> "no".
>>>>>> <http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=11,17> itsrdf:withinText 
>>>>>> "yes".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, if you want to process this in SPARQL asking for all non 
>>>>>> translatable items you would write something like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SELECT ?translatableItems
>>>>>> WHERE { ?translatableItems 
>>>>>> <http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf#translate> "no" }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and get as a result
>>>>>> http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=23,30
>>>>>> http://example.com/exampledoc.html#char=11,17
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this make sense and would it work for what you have in mind?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I understand from what I've read that it is maybe easier to 
>>>>>>> read, more compact?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phil
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 17 Apr 2013, at 08:22, "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org 
>>>>>>> <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Dave, Phil, all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have put the ontology on the w3c server. The namespace
>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf#
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf#translate
>>>>>>>> resolve with 303 "see other" to
>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf-content/its-rdf.rdf (in 
>>>>>>>> RDF/XML version)
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf-content/its-rdf.html
>>>>>>>> in the latter we can put some more documentation, but for the 
>>>>>>>> time being what is here is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you discuss today whether people would agree with this? 
>>>>>>>> Note that we then should define the namespace for the ontology 
>>>>>>>> also in
>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#notation
>>>>>>>> and this would mean that we reference the ontology normatively. 
>>>>>>>> If people agree with this, could you give me an action item to 
>>>>>>>> add the ontology URI during todays call?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Note for all implementers: this wouldn't influence you only if 
>>>>>>>> you implement the NIF conversion. Currently this is Sebastian 
>>>>>>>> and I - anybody else?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 17.04.13 09:04, schrieb Phil Ritchie:
>>>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I certainly want to work on transforming some Xliff with ITS 
>>>>>>>>> LQI and Provenance data into RDF so I'd like to chip in with this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure I have all of the understanding necessary though 
>>>>>>>>> - particularly around schema creation and validation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Would it be worthwhile having a conf. call to get on the same 
>>>>>>>>> page? I should be on today's call so we could chat then.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to participate in that discussion - I can't be on 
>>>>>>>> the call today. But feel free to to discuss & hopefully we can 
>>>>>>>> bring up the topic again next week, or on a separate, dedicated 
>>>>>>>> call - would you be available Phil?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Felix
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Phil
>>>>>>>>> Twitter: philinthecloud
>>>>>>>>> Skype: philviathecloud
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 17 Apr 2013, at 01:38, "Dave Lewis" <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jirka, Felix, Sebastian, all,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've updated ITS-RDF ontology as follows:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1) I agree with Felix's comment to remove custom XML schema 
>>>>>>>>>> types for attributes as RDf platforms in general don't 
>>>>>>>>>> validate against these, instead just specifying the simple 
>>>>>>>>>> XML schema type as appropriate, e.g. xsd:string, xsd:anyURI, 
>>>>>>>>>> xsd:decimal, xsd:nonNegativeInteger, xsd:integer
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2) for data categories with standoff markup I've introduced a 
>>>>>>>>>> class to allow the correct grouping of indivdual attiributes 
>>>>>>>>>> to the a specfic item. These calsses are ProvRecord and 
>>>>>>>>>> LocalizationQualityIssue
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 3) for annotatorsRef I have just introduced individual 
>>>>>>>>>> attributes for each data categoriy where it applies, namely: 
>>>>>>>>>> termAnnotatorsRef, taAnnotatorsRef, mtConfidenceAnnotatorsRef
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 4) I've omitted anything related to Ruby
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I believe this is consistent with the NIF related text in the 
>>>>>>>>>> current draft.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've attached the ontology as a Turtle file, and have updated 
>>>>>>>>>> the same on:
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/ITS-RDF_mapping 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/ITS-RDF_mapping#Ontology_.28DRAFT.29> 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If we can firm up on this then I propose documenting it in a 
>>>>>>>>>> more accessible format as per W3C norms. In addition we will 
>>>>>>>>>> need some best practice guidance on using this ontology with 
>>>>>>>>>> at least both NIF and PROV-O. I'm happy to work on these 
>>>>>>>>>> also, though all other inputs welcome.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 29/03/2013 13:37, Jirka Kosek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dave,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> on the last telcon I have been tasked to "refresh" and try to move
>>>>>>>>>>> forward some issues. Could you please implemented changes below into
>>>>>>>>>>> proposed ITS RDF Ontology.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Jirka
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 25.2.2013 9:04, MultilingualWeb-LT Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> mlw-lt-track-ISSUE-119: ITS RDF Ontology creation [MLW-LT Standard Draft]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/119
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Raised by: Felix Sasaki
>>>>>>>>>>>> On product: MLW-LT Standard Draft
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dave started an ITS RDF Ontology. See
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/ITS-RDF_mapping#Ontology_.28DRAFT.29
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is useful for the NIF conversion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There was an offline discussion about this, including Dave, Leroy, Sebastian and I.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some thoughts about the ontology current at
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/ITS-RDF_mapping#Ontology_.28DRAFT.29
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - the ontology uses various RDF classes that are not defined, e.g. "itstype:its-taConfidence.type" is identified as a class via
>>>>>>>>>>>> "rdf:type itstype:its-taConfidence.type"
>>>>>>>>>>>> So *if* one want to use "itstype:its-taConfidence.type" as a class, you'd need also
>>>>>>>>>>>> itstype:its-taConfidence.type rdf:type rdf:Class
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - classes are normally written in upper case, so
>>>>>>>>>>>> "its-taConfidence.type" would be
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Its-taConfidence.type"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - As said in the offline thread (sorry for the repetition, guys), I would not define such classes at all. It would be sufficient to define actually no class - just use NIF URIs, and then have statements like this
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> someNIFBasedSubjectUri
>>>>>>>>>>>>  its:locQualityIssueComment[1] "'c'es' is unknown. Could be 'c'est'";
>>>>>>>>>>>>  its:locQualityIssueEnabled[1]="yes" ;
>>>>>>>>>>>>  its:locQualityIssueSeverity[1] "50";
>>>>>>>>>>>>  its:locQualityIssueType "misspelling".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The RDF predicates would take as a domain a NIF URI, and as the range an XML literal (or HTML literal, if we use RDF 1.1).
>>>>>>>>>>>> This approach has also the advantage that you can convert the test suite output easily to RDF "instance" data.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Felix
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <itsrdf.ttl>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ************************************************************
>>>>>>>>> VistaTEC Ltd. Registered in Ireland 268483.
>>>>>>>>> Registered Office, VistaTEC House, 700, South Circular Road,
>>>>>>>>> Kilmainham. Dublin 8. Ireland.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The information contained in this message, including any 
>>>>>>>>> accompanying
>>>>>>>>> documents, is confidential and is intended only for the 
>>>>>>>>> addressee(s).
>>>>>>>>> The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, or alteration of this
>>>>>>>>> message is strictly forbidden. If you have received this 
>>>>>>>>> message in
>>>>>>>>> error please notify the sender immediately.
>>>>>>>>> ************************************************************
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ************************************************************
>>>>>>> VistaTEC Ltd. Registered in Ireland 268483.
>>>>>>> Registered Office, VistaTEC House, 700, South Circular Road,
>>>>>>> Kilmainham. Dublin 8. Ireland.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The information contained in this message, including any 
>>>>>>> accompanying
>>>>>>> documents, is confidential and is intended only for the 
>>>>>>> addressee(s).
>>>>>>> The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, or alteration of this
>>>>>>> message is strictly forbidden. If you have received this message in
>>>>>>> error please notify the sender immediately.
>>>>>>> ************************************************************
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
>>>> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
>>>> Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://linguistics.okfn.org , 
>>>> http://dbpedia.org/Wiktionary , http://dbpedia.org
>>>> Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
>>>> Research Group: http://aksw.org
>>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
> Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://linguistics.okfn.org , 
> http://dbpedia.org/Wiktionary , http://dbpedia.org
> Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
> Research Group: http://aksw.org

Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 22:54:44 UTC