- From: Paul Buitelaar <paul.buitelaar@deri.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 09:48:24 +0000
- To: John McCrae <jmccrae@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
- CC: public-ontolex@w3.org
On 21/02/2013 18:04, John McCrae wrote: > Hi, > > In lemon we have previously said that lexica are monolingual to avoid > having to repeat the language for each entry. ok - we will adhere to that and change the examples > I did find something that really puzzled me: > > :left upper lobe posterior segment artery:decomposition ( > [ lemon:element :artery ] > [ lemon:element :left upper lobe artery ] > [ lemon:element :posterior segment artery ] ) . > > According to the existing /lemon/ documentation we use decomposition to > indicate tokenization or decompounding... hence you are saying the > tokenization of "left upper lobe posterior segment arterty" is > ["artery","left upper lobe artery","posterior segment artery"]. I'm > pretty sure what you mean to use is the subterm property as we have > already discussed several times. yes, this is a mistake - we will chnage using subterms with 'artery', 'left upper lobe', 'posterior segment' > However I am still puzzled as to what you are attempting to represent in > the lexicon. These terms have clear subclass or partOf relations that > can be represented in the ontology, which is clearly of use. However the > lexical relationships are fairly trivial and could be easily constructed > by examining the tokenization of each of these terms. I guess you want > to represent that > > X Y artery = X artery + Y artery yes correct - let's discuss how to best represent this (perhaps better offline) Paul > On the lexical layer, this is trivial... we need only compare the > lexical entries of the tokens to establish this. A single property makes > this more explicit (and hence easier to query), but I don't feel there > would be any need for extra modelling beyond the standard syntactic > analysis of lexical entries, as such relationships are easy to infer. > > On the ontological layer, we have that XYArtery = XArtery ∏ YArtery, > which can be represented in OWL > > My only guess is that you want to do some sense level mapping X Y artery > uses the words "X" exactly as "X artery" does (i.e., with the same > sense) and "Y" exactly as "Y artery" does. For this the modelling would > be complex and I don't clearly see the application, perhaps you could > elucidate? > > Regards, > John > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Paul Buitelaar <paul.buitelaar@deri.org > <mailto:paul.buitelaar@deri.org>> wrote: > > On 21/02/2013 16:07, Philipp Cimiano wrote: > > And you do not need to repeat n times that the lexicon is English: > > > that answers my question - i.e. if we mix lexical entries from > different languages then we need to add the language ID for each > entry - if not then not as the language ID will be a metadatum on > the lexicon > > > > :lexicon lemon:entry :left ; > lemon:language "en" . > > :lexicon lemon:entry :upper ; > lemon:language "en" . > > :lexicon lemon:entry :lobe ; > lemon:language "en" . > > :lexicon lemon:entry :posterior ; > lemon:language "en" . > > :lexicon lemon:entry :segment ; > lemon:language "en" . > > :lexicon lemon:entry :artery > lemon:language "en" . > > ;-) > > > > > Am 21.02.13 16:55, schrieb Paul Buitelaar: > > Hi Philipp, we added lemon RDF to the examples on > > http://www.w3.org/community/__ontolex/wiki/Specification_of___Requirements_on___Terminological_Analysis > <http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements_on_Terminological_Analysis> > > > Cheers > > > Paul > > On 21/02/2013 07:28, Philipp Cimiano wrote: > > Dear all, > > this is to inform you that tomorrow we will have our > regular ontolex > teleconference. > > We will continue our discussion of particular examples, > in particular > looking at the contributions here: > > http://www.w3.org/community/__ontolex/wiki/Specification_of___Requirements/Lexicon-Ontology-__Mapping > <http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements/Lexicon-Ontology-Mapping> > > > > > http://www.w3.org/community/__ontolex/wiki/Specification_of___Requirements_on___Terminological_Analysis > <http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements_on_Terminological_Analysis> > > > > > http://www.w3.org/community/__ontolex/wiki/Specification_of___Requirements/Properties-and-__Relations-of-Entries > <http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements/Properties-and-Relations-of-Entries> > > > > > Paul/Mihael: I do not see any RDF examples in the wiki > yet, will you > manage to work them out until tomorrow? > > Elena/Lupe: same for you, I do not see any RDF examples > in the wiki > yet > > John: you wanted to work out how to represent Lexical > Nets* in lemon, > with WordNet as an example; can you please provide > some RDF code for > this? > > From then on, I would discuss how to i) model > lexico-syntactic > patterns (Dagmar: are you going to be there?) and ii) > how to link > entries across resources. We could start with Framenet / > Verbnet for > example, then showing how they can be used within a > lemon lexical > entry. Linking to wiktionary could be also considered as > well as to > ISOCAT. > > Another issue will be to look at modelling > terminological resources > in the lexicon-ontology model. > > Thanks to everybody. We have to get concrete and produce > some (draft > of a) spec this year ;-) > > Philipp. > > > > > > -- > Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano > Semantic Computing Group > Excellence Cluster - Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC) > University of Bielefeld > > Phone: +49 521 106 12249 <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012249> > Fax: +49 521 106 12412 <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012412> > Mail:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-__bielefeld.de > <mailto:Mail%3Acimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> > > Room H-127 > Morgenbreede 39 > 33615 Bielefeld > > > >
Received on Friday, 22 February 2013 09:49:12 UTC