RE: Next Ontolex Meeting, tomorrow, Feb 22, 12:00

Hi Philipp,


I do not see really other alternatives really. We have to think about
whether this is what we want? 



Surely for the basic mapping this is the straight mapping and there are no
alternatives, and I totally agree with you that we have first to think about
if this what we want (I’m not totally sure even, and would gladly listen to
any objection on it), before thinking how to do it.


In general: are there any arguments why we should consider aligning to SKOS
/ SKOS-XL?



Well, in terms of reuse, and building on top of already existing standards
(and being able to reuse existing tools), I would reformulate the question
as “are there any arguments why we should consider for NOT aligning to
SKOS/SKOS-XL”? But, we go back to the original question above.

 

Cheers,

 

Armando

 

 

 


Philipp.

Am 21.02.13 12:25, schrieb Armando Stellato:

Dear all,

 

I’m sorry I cannot attend too. The one-week shift collided with student
exams I set in advance for that date.

However, in the previous days I added more info on:

http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements/Metad
ata#Metadata_about_RDF_Linguistic_Resources

 

and defined two sets of metadata (one for Lexical Nets, and one for
ontologies enriched with linguistic info). Plus, I reported on my thoughts
(and discussions with other people) regarding the subjects of these
metadata. More to come in the following days.

 

Finally, getting back to a previous msg from Aldo about
http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements/Linke
d_Data, and his observations about SKOS. I think it is important to
understand if and how SKOS (and SKOS-XL) may be reused in this modeling. 

SKOS concepts may provide the conceptual backbone of lexical resources (e.g.
synsets in wordnet), while reified labels coming from SKOS-XL may allow for
the specification of lexical relationships. Thus, while sitting on top of
the SKOS-XL skeleton, this could be only a:

1)      Subclassing work: e.g. define Senses, Lexical Entry etc… as specific
subclasses of SKOS(XL) elements.

2)      Instantiation:  e.g. A vocabulary of reusable, shareable, lexical
relationships.

 

Cheers,

 

Armando

 

From: Guadalupe Aguado [mailto:gac280771@gmail.com] 
Sent: giovedì 21 febbraio 2013 09.30
To: Philipp Cimiano
Cc: public-ontolex@w3.org <mailto:public-ontolex@w3.org> 
Subject: Re: Next Ontolex Meeting, tomorrow, Feb 22, 12:00

 

Dear Philipp

I'm afraid I won't be able to attend the meeting, as I'll be in a doctoral
thesis board.

Elena will attend the meeting.

Best regards

Lupe

 

2013/2/21 Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
<mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> >

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/Lexic
on-Ontology-Mapping

http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements_on_Te
rminological_Analysis

http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Specification_of_Requirements/Prope
rties-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:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> 

Room H-127
Morgenbreede 39
33615 Bielefeld



 






-- 
Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
Semantic Computing Group
Excellence Cluster - Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
University of Bielefeld
 
Phone: +49 521 106 12249
Fax: +49 521 106 12412
Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
<mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> 
 
Room H-127
Morgenbreede 39
33615 Bielefeld