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

Armando,

  I agree with you.

Btw. I recently found a blog that summarizes experiences with SKOS-XL 
from a developer's point of view:

http://topquadrantblog.blogspot.de/2012/07/who-needs-skos-xl-maybe-no-one.html 


Just as a source of inspiration...

;-)

Philipp.

Am 22.02.13 10:54, schrieb Armando Stellato:
>
> 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/Metadata#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/Linked_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/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/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: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


-- 
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

Room H-127
Morgenbreede 39
33615 Bielefeld