Re: Open Issues in the Model

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Jorge Gracia <jgracia@fi.upm.es> wrote:

> Hi John/all,
>
> Here you are my comments on some of your reported issues...
>
> 2014-10-10 20:07 GMT+02:00 John P. McCrae <jmccrae@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
> >:
>
>> Core:
>>
>>    - We could/should consider using dct:language instead of
>>    ontolex:languageURI
>>
>> Yes, I would be in favour. The drawback, though, is the redundancy of
> names we would have: ontolex:language (for string languages) and
> dct:language (for URI languages). I think that is the reason why we
> introduced "languageURI"
>
>
>> Variation
>>
>>    - Lexical Variant is defined between either forms *or* lexical
>>    entries... there should be a class that is only for forms and a class that
>>    is only for entries
>>
>> What about TerminologicalVariant (for senses), LexicalVariant (for
> entries), and FormVariant (for forms) ?
> Or even simpler!: SenseVariant, EntityVariant, FormVariant
>
Yes!!!!

>
>>    - All variants are specified only in their 'reified' form, do we want
>>    to allow users to directly state variation between two entries (or forms or
>>    senses) with a single triple?
>>
>> A possible option is to use OWL2 "punning" (
> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-new-features/#F12:_Punning), although I am not
> familiarised with it and I do not control their possible implications well
>
Yeah the issue is that we probably don't want to pun the classes as
properties.. we want to be able to say something like this

:sense1 lexinfo:antonym :sense2 .

Where

lexinfo:antonym rdfs:subPropertyOf vartrans:senseVariant

Currently we have to do the following:

:antonym1 a vartrans:Variant ;
  vartrans:source :sense1 ;
  vartrans:target :sense2 ;
  vartrans:category lexinfo:antonym .

Regards,
John

>
>>    - Are the Interlingual-/IntralingualVariant classes necessary?
>>
>> I think we already decided in the last telco to remove them, as all the
> possible variants are already covered by the other types. Am I right?
>
>
>> Metadata
>>
>>    - The Lexicon class is a duplicate of one already in the core
>>
>> In any case I would keep it in the core as a first class citizen (and I
> see no reason why reusing it in other modules, such as the "metadata" one,
> would not be possible)
>
> Regards,
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
> --
> Jorge Gracia, PhD
> Ontology Engineering Group
> Artificial Intelligence Department
> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
> http://jogracia.url.ph/web/
>