Dear Armando, Philipp, John, all, see my comments below. 2014-03-08 5:06 GMT+01:00 Armando Stellato <stellato@info.uniroma2.it>: > Yes, absolutely agree that we should provide the SPARQL constructs, as > an operational way to express their semantics. I think we already have > them, as Manuel has written them in a LIME exporter component (we should > just readjust the output according to the structure we want to build..see > previous emails). > Unfortunately, it is not that simple to express the semantics of LIME in terms of a SPARQL construct. In fact, even simply counting the lexicalizations of a given type of resources may be problematic, as it depends on the combination of two queries: a query for iterating over the interesting resources, and a query for selecting the lexicalizations. Note that both queries depend on the specific use case, i.e. the modeling vocabulary, and the linguistic enrichment model. That said, I would really appreciate a specification expressed somehow in SPARQL terms, as in the case of VOAF ( http://lov.okfn.org/vocab/voaf/v2.3/index.html). -- Manuel Fiorelli PhD student in Computer and Automation Engineering Dept. of Computer Science, Systems and Production University of Rome "Tor Vergata" Via del Politecnico 1 00133 Roma, Italy tel: +39-06-7259-7334 skype: fiorelli.m
Received on Monday, 10 March 2014 10:23:43 UTC