- From: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 14:17:58 +0200
- To: Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
- Cc: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it>, "public-ontolex@w3.org" <public-ontolex@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <68000114-E347-4A88-9AFC-99445D150011@cnr.it>
Dear Philipp, all On Jul 5, 2013, at 6:56:32 AM , Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > Dear all, > > I attach the current version of the OWL ontology for ontolex core as well as an update diagram. > > On the last telco there was basically agreement on this. I kindly ask you to raise any remaining issues until Thursday next week. > > The telco on Friday 12th will be devoted to to a formal vote on the core, but we will also accept votes per email. > > From the point of time we formally agree on the core, all changes to the core will only be done after the majority here agrees on the changes. > > I have only one issue myself: So far, there are two "denotes"-relations in ontolex.owl. The first one is a properietary one introduced by ontolex.owl and the other comes from semiotics.owl. > > If possible, we should reuse the one from semiotics.owl I think. > > Aldo/all: is there any problem you see with that? I do not see any problem. More verbosely, I agree because ontolex:OntologyEntity is a subclass of semio:Reference, while ontolex:LexicalEntry is a subclass of semio:Expression, and the intended conceptualization of ontolex:denotes is totally compatible with that of semio:denotes. In order to make things progress, I edited Philipp's ontology (attached with a versioned name) by adding axioms there are missing in my view. For the denotes issue I only added an owl:equivalentProperty axiom, by please feel free to collapse ontolex:denotes as you suggest. More in detail, that's the list of axioms that I added, please tell me if I'm wrong: # denotes issue: ontolex:denotes owl:equivalentClass semio:denotes . # adding ontolex:OntologyEntity (depicted abd assumed, but not in ontology): ontolex:OntologyEntity rdf:type owl:Class . ontolex:OntologyEntity rdfs:subClassOf semio:Reference . # subclassing LexicalConcept as a type of semio:Meaning (no disagreement on my proposal, correct?): ontolex:LexicalConcept rdfs:subClassOf semio:Meaning . # subpropertying ontolex properties to semiotics.owl properties for complete alignment: ontolex:sense rdfs:subPropertyOf semio:hasInterpretant . ontolex:evokes rdfs:subPropertyOf semio:hasInterpretant . ontolex:reference rdfs:subPropertyOf semio:isConceptualizationOf . ontolex:concept rdfs:subPropertyOf semio:hasConceptualization . also added some (already agreed but missing) domain and range axioms. > > Once the core is done we will distribute responsabilities to work on a number of single modules: syntax-semantics / terminological and morphological variation / pragmatics / patterns and constructions, etc. We will devote one conference in a month to each of these modules. +1 > > I willl rely on responsibles for each of these modules to prepare content and discussions. I advance that we might move to 2h regular telcos from then on. > > I will bring up the issue of moving to a W3C Working group again. As a first indication, could you all let me know if you are W3C members? Yes, CNR is a member Aldo
> > Talk to you today! > > Philipp. > > -- > 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 > > <ontolex.owl><ontolex.pdf>
Attachments
- application/octet-stream attachment: ontolex_05-07-13.owl
Received on Friday, 5 July 2013 12:18:28 UTC