Re: synsem module

Dear Philipp

We've tried to put our money where our mouth is so here is a rough and
ready version in RDF of the buy/sell example  as well as a diagram of part
of the example, as inspired by a more LMF type aproach:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dojqhFMHTswFWUarQAbeVo3ap6_UjDLyN9gTPydqr_g/edit

Cheers,

Fahad & Francesca


On 22 August 2014 10:37, Fahad Khan <anasfkhan81@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Philipp,
> Sorry for the delay in responding,  we have been on holiday too the last
> couple of weeks.  We were planning to send something to the list before we
> went away, but it turns out the translation was harder to do than we
> thought (and our collective knowledge of lmf less comprehensive) and we
> weren't entirely happy with what we came up with.  However we will send you
> a slightly polished version of our proposed example next week before the
> telco -- after having hopefully discussed it with colleagues far more well
> versed in lmf than us.
> Cheers
> Fahad and Francesca
>  Dear all,
>
>    I returned from holidays end of last week. Given that some people are
> still on holidays, I propose we have our next telco on Friday 29th at the
> regular slot, i.e. 15:00 (CET). I will send out an announcement soon.
>
> @Fahad and Francesca: regarding our email thread before the holidays,
> would you please be so kind to send an example of the modelling of frames
> that is in your view appropriate, an LMF document would be fine for now so
> that we can study the LMF modelling in more detail in the next telco and
> then propose appropriate vocabulary elements in the synsem module to do the
> job. Starting from LMF seems a good idea to me as I mentione a few weeks
> ago.
>
> I will continue working with the vartrans and metadata modules from next
> week on until we receive the input form Fahad and Francesca to continue the
> work on the synsem module.
>
> I regard the ontolex and decomp modules as largely finished. Please check
> the ontologies and examples carefully so that we can soon agree to release
> them.
>
> Looking forward to continuing with our work.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Philipp.
>
> Am 02.08.14 18:46, schrieb Manuel Fiorelli:
>
>  Hi Philipp, All
>
>  sorry for the delayed response, which is in fact quite simple.  See below.
>
> 2014-08-01 11:53 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano <
> cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>:
>
>>
>> Am 01.08.14 00:10, schrieb Manuel Fiorelli:
>>
>>   My objection is that you split the description of the semantic frame
>> into two blocks. In each block, you associated the frame with subframes,
>> each one associating a semantic role with a syntactic argument. Having
>> these two blocks, I can easily understand that the semantic frame has three
>> roles, which maps to the syntactic arguments. Conversely, it I consider
>> these two blocks together, as they are in reality, then I am not sure I can
>> easily spot the "shape" of the semantic frame.
>>
>>    Yes, that is the only objection I can see so far as well. Let's give
>> a deeper look at this after the holidays, ok?
>>
>
>  I used the word "objection", which is quite a strong word. Maybe
> "observation" would have been a better choice. Nevertheless, I agree with
> you that we can continue the discussion after the holidays.
>
>  Meanwhile, happy holidays to everybody listening to this thread, and the
> rest of the OntoLex community :-D
>
>
> --
> --
> Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
> AG Semantic Computing
> Exzellenzcluster für Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
> Universität Bielefeld
>
> Tel: +49 521 106 12249
> Fax: +49 521 106 6560
> Mail: cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>
> Office CITEC-2.307
> Universitätsstr. 21-25
> 33615 Bielefeld, NRW
> Germany
>
>