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

Re: teleconference tomorrow 15:00

From: Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:01:00 +0200
Message-ID: <54479C7C.3070208@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
To: public-ontolex@w3.org
Jorge, all,

  great. Can we discuss the example on Friday?

Philipp.

Am 17.10.14 17:30, schrieb Jorge Gracia:
> Hi Philipp,
>
> >  rethinking this, my feeling would be that we recommend the use of 
> the PROV-O vocabulary to add an an activity and or
> > agent that produces the Translation.This can be an algorithm of 
> course. Human validation should be another type of activity.
>
> We have not comment on this during the telco... but in principle this 
> sounds good to me. Let me try to set up an example by next week and 
> let's see how it looks like...
>
> Regards,
> Jorge
>
> 2014-10-17 11:46 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano 
> <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de 
> <mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>>:
>
>     Jorge, all,
>
>      rethinking this, my feeling would be that we recommend the use of
>     the PROV-O vocabulary to add an an activity and or agent that
>     produces the Translation.
>     This can be an algorithm of course. Human validation should be
>     another type of activity.
>
>     So maybe this is not a case for adding new vocabulary, but showing
>     how to use PROV-O in the context of ontolex to add such metadata.
>     The confidence should be in my view also a confidence of the
>     algorihtm or human that produced the translation. As such, there
>     could be even different confidences by different agents on the
>     same Translation, is that correct?
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Philipp.
>
>     Am 16.10.14 12:34, schrieb John P. McCrae:
>>
>>
>>     On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Jorge Gracia <jgracia@fi.upm.es
>>     <mailto:jgracia@fi.upm.es>> wrote:
>>
>>         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.
>>
>>     I think we agreed to keep this as a data category, as it is very
>>     hard to define 'confidence' in general
>>
>>     Regards,
>>     John
>>
>>
>>         Regards,
>>         Jorge
>>
>>         2014-10-16 9:32 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano
>>         <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>>         <mailto: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  <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012249>
>>             Fax:+49 521 106 6560  <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%206560>
>>             Mail:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de  <mailto: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/
>>
>>
>
>     -- 
>     --
>     Prof. Dr. Philipp Cimiano
>     AG Semantic Computing
>     Exzellenzcluster für Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
>     Universität Bielefeld
>
>     Tel:+49 521 106 12249  <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%2012249>
>     Fax:+49 521 106 6560  <tel:%2B49%20521%20106%206560>
>     Mail:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de  <mailto: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/

-- 
--
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
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2014 12:01:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:36:45 UTC