Re: ontolex.owl

Hi I will try to attend this telco. Anyway, I missed the discussion about not including semiotics.owl in the spec. I remember we said these alignments should not be part of the core itself, but maybe we should mention that it exists in the owl implementation, and why. As it is, it sounds bizarre :)
Aldo

sent by aldo from a mobile

> On 23/giu/2014, at 08:28, Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I have been working on ensuring consistency of the ontolex.owl module with the spec.
> 
> I have:
> 
> 1) made sure that all axioms in the ontology correspond to those in the spec; the ontology is consistent ;-)
> 2) ensured that all domain / ranges match
> 3) introduced examples illustrating the use in the git under directory "Examples"
> 4) included the semiotics.owl ontology as we decided some time ago; we agreed to not have this in the spec, but in the actual ontology, see ontology file
> 
> I attach the current version of the ontolex.owl module (see attached).
> 
> I would kindly ask you to help me to ensure that the example in Examples are fine. I did not find a service to validate the files (they are in Turtle syntax). Can someone please check them and modify them appropriately, modifying also the spec where these example are given?
> 
> I would like to finalize the model on our telco on Friday, so please raise any concerns this week.
> 
> Please carefully review the ontology and the text; if you spot any issues, please let me know.
> 
> I have added a pointer to the GIT in the main wiki page.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Philipp.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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
> 
> <OntolexCore.png>

Received on Friday, 27 June 2014 12:22:06 UTC