Re: teleconference tomorrow 15:00

Dear Philipp, all,

I have removed the inter/intralingual variants form the wiki final
specification (as we already agreed on that) and done some cleaning in the
Vartrans module (fix wrong prefixes and stuff like that).

I would add a couple of minor bullets in the agenda, for the Vartrans
module:
- Find a name for a superproperty of vartrans:source and vartrans:target to
be used in case the directionality of the variation relation is not known
or it is not important.
- Possibility of adding a couple of properties to Translation such as
confidence degree or a boolean indicating whether it is human validated,
for instance.

Regards,
Jorge

2014-10-16 9:32 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>:

>  Dear all,
>
>  this is a gentle reminder that we will have our weekly ontolex
> teleconference on Friday, 15:00.
> I will circulate access details by latest tomorrow.
>
> Here are the main agenda points (taken from John's email):
>
> Core:
>
>    - In core there is now a 'SenseLexicon' class but no property to
>    relate it any other elements in the model
>    - We could/should consider using dct:language instead of
>    ontolex:languageURI
>    - We cannot give conditions when a Lexical Sense should apply (lemon
>    had a condition property for this)
>    - It would be useful to indicate when a mapping is dependent on the
>    range or domain of a property (possibly)
>    - Should we add subclasses of LexicalEntry as follows Word,
>    MultiWordExpression, Affix?
>
> Syntax and Semantics
>
>    - There is no property to indicate the conjugation (morphological
>    pattern) of a word
>
>  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
>    - 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?
>    - Are the Interlingual-/IntralingualVariant classes necessary?
>
>  Metadata
>
>    - There is no link between the metadata module and any other module in
>    OntoLex
>    - The Lexicon class is a duplicate of one already in the core
>    - The language property is a duplicate of one defined in the core
>    - ConceptualizedLinguisticResource is not used by any other part of
>    module
>    - The 'lexical link set' class and property are not used by any other
>    part of the module
>    - Several properties are named the same as classes except for the case
>    of the first letter: resourceCoverage, language, lexicalLinkSet and
>    lexicalization
>    - Is the 'linguistic model' really required by every lexicalization?
>
>
> Please check also the examples on the metadata module that I will send
> today.
>
> We should also discuss the issue brought up by Francesca. My feeling is
> also that it is akward to see anonyms as "variants". They are clearly
> semantic relations that we should not specify further. So we could think
> about introducing a generic "senseRelation".
>
> On the issue of variation that John raises: we could add two classes
> LexicalFormVariant and LexicalSenseVariant; the interlingual and
> intralingual variants we agreed to leave out of the model. But we wanted to
> keep translation as a subclass of LexicalSenseVariant I think.
>
> Talk to you tomorrow,
>
> Philipp.
>
>
> --
> --
> 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
>
>


-- 
Jorge Gracia, PhD
Ontology Engineering Group
Artificial Intelligence Department
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
http://jogracia.url.ph/web/