Re: [public-ontolex] <none>

Dear all,

    please remember that we will have our regular telco this week on 
Friday at 15:00 (CET). You will find access details etc. here:

http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Teleconference,_2013.15.11,_15-16_pm_CET

The agenda is:

- Variation and Translation Module  (15 min)
- Syntax and Semantics Mapping Module (15 min)
- Linking to SKOS (15 min)
- Metadata Module (lime) (15 min)

Looking forward to talking to you all on Friday. If there are more 
issues, please let me know.


Philipp.

Am 14.11.13 12:52, schrieb Armando Stellato:
>
> Dear all,
>
> one important question raised by John in the last meeting, about LIME 
> (LInguistic MEtadata...or...the green brother of LEMON :-) ).
>
> "Ok, I understand the need for metadata about how an ontology is 
> enriched/covered by lexical info, but is in the scope of Ontolex to 
> provide metadata/categories about linguistic resources?" (John, I hope 
> I synthetized your point appropriately)
>
> In:
> http://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Metadata_Module
>
> I reported the first draft of LIME vocabulary.
>
> As you may see, there are properties/classes for synthetizing the 
> "linguistic asset" of an ontology.
>
> Then, there are classes representing various kind of linguistic 
> resources (Dictionary, BilingualDictionary) and their 
> switchable characteristics (hasGlosses, hasTaxonomy etc..). And these 
> were the focus of John's question.
>
> I give here a few reasons for which these should be part of Ontolex:
>
> 1) if we want to describe how ontologies can be interface with 
> lexicons, we should be able to provide enough details about the 
> lexicon (though this has not to include the description of a 
> Linguistic Resource)
>
> 2) we already mapped WordNet, and I thought we were addressing how to 
> map various LRs
>
> 3) we have a module about lexical linked data, isn't the above 
> metadata about that lexical linked data which we already included in 
> the scope?
>
> I then could provide other motivations for interesting scenarios: for 
> instance, ten years ago, I wrote a (initially) simple plugin for 
> Protege, called OntoLing, usable for enriching ontologies with content 
> coming from linguistic resources. The plugin attracted the attention 
> of many people who found finally a tool for performing this task, and 
> the good thing is that the tool could be easily  customizable throug 
> plugins. The theory behind that is: "tell me what a resource is, and I 
> tell how to use it at its best". We thus could easily plug WordNet, 
> EuroWordnet, FreeDict, Freelang dictionaries etc.. and we could add 
> easily as well add other resources provided by partners in specific 
> projects. This description later took a life on its own, being called 
> Linguistic Watermark.
>
> Other important scenarios are ontology mapping ones: today after years 
> of OAEI contests, still access to lexical resource for supporting 
> matchhing, is considered foundamental, though it is still not:
> 1) clear
> 2) systematic
> and including the support from ling resources is more a craftwork than 
> a clear asset in any alignment workflow/architecture
>
> The Linguistic Watermark was initially only a software engineering 
> solution for modeling heterogeneous resources (not available as RDF) 
> to be dynamically loaded into a consistent framework for enriching 
> ontologies. Years later, with RDF technologies getting more ground, 
> time was mature for thinking about a way to represent this info in 
> RDF, that's were (part of) the LW became the ancestor of what we are 
> now presenting as LIME.
>
> All of the above has surely something to do with interfacing 
> Ontologies with Lexicons.
>
> Ok, obviously, I had to advocate the thing ;-) but I totally 
> understand the importance of the question from John, so...discussion 
> is open!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Armando
>
> P.S: This email was also agreed last week, to provide the needed 
> background, in order to start the discussion in our meetings
>
>
>
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Armando Stellato, PhD
> AI Research Group at Tor Vergata (ART)
> Dept. of Computer Science, Systems and Production
> University of Roma Tor Vergata
> Via del Politecnico 1
> 00133 Roma, Italy
>
> email: stellato@info.uniroma2.it <mailto:stellato@info.uniroma2.it>
> home: http://art.uniroma2.it/stellato
> office +39-06-72597330
> lab.   +39-06-72597332
> fax    +39-06-72597460
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 

Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano

Phone: +49 521 106 12249
Fax: +49 521 106 12412
Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de

Forschungsbau Intelligente Systeme (FBIIS)
Raum 2.307
Universität Bielefeld
Inspiration 1
33619 Bielefeld