W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ontolex@w3.org > June 2014

Comments on lime.owl

From: John P. McCrae <jmccrae@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 13:49:08 +0200
Message-ID: <CAC5njqpvpNAY3j0NenxSDGqfFvQdQmvBcu46c1nq=4avG5JWyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-ontolex <public-ontolex@w3.org>
Hi Manuel, Armando, all,

Some comments on the lime.owl file

   - Should Lexicon, Lexicalization and co. really be subclasses of
   void:Dataset. A void:Dataset is defined as a "set of RDF triples that are
   published, maintained or aggregated by a single provider". Thus, it seems
   that many lexica and lexicalizations can be in the same dataset and
   conversely it is very hard to define which triples are in a lexicon (for
   example interlingual links are shared between two lexica). It would make
   more sense to me to have lexica, lexicalizaitons, etc., as part of a
   dataset, but not as datasets themselves.
   - What is a "conceptualized linguistic resource"? This is not really
   clear to me.
   - How does a "lexical linkset" differ from a "linkset"? (i.e, do we need
   this class?)
   - What is the range of lime:class? How does it differ from void:class?
   - Shouldn't there be an object property linking a lexicalization to an
   ontology?
   - 'language' is already in the core OntoLex model, do we need it in lime?
   - How do you count lexicalizations? i.e., is it the number of
   Lexicalization instances or the number of lexicalized reference/entry pairs.
   - What are the domains of the properties lexicalEntries, senses,
   references, etc.?
   - Shouldn't we also count LexicalConcepts and Forms?

Regards,
John
Received on Friday, 6 June 2014 11:49:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:36:40 UTC