Re: Changes in synsem and vartrans

Dear Philipp, all,

As for the synsem module, I think that the changes you are proposing 
make complete sense, and I find the name OntoMap quite intuitive.

As regards the translation property, an alternative to what Jorge was 
proposing could be: equivalentTranslation/isEquivalentTranslationOf 
(though I am also not 100% happy with it either...), or maybe just 
equivalent/isEquivalentTo...

Talk to you on Friday!
Elena.

El 07/07/2015 a las 12:44, Jorge Gracia escribió:
> Dear Philipp, all
>
> In the vartrans module, a "translation" property is defined as a 
> shortcut of the "Translation" class [1]. However, the chosen 
> identifier violates our rule of not using the same word to identify 
> both a class and a property. A new name should be found for this 
> property.
> Nevertheless, if such a property is there for backwards compatibility 
> only, I see a simpler solution, which is to use lexinfo:translation 
> and define it as a sense relation:
>
> lexinfo:translation rdfs:subPropertyOf vartrans:senseRel
>
> (although I am not 100% happy with this solution, either). Maybe we 
> could briefly discuss about this in our next telco.
>
> Regards,
> Jorge
>
>
>
>
> [1] 
> https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#Translation_as_a_relation_between_lexical_senses
>
> 2015-07-06 10:19 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano 
> <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de 
> <mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>>:
>
>     Dear all,
>
>      I have implemented now all the changes in the vartrans module
>     that Manuel, Jorge and Lupe pointed me to. Also the ontologies and
>     the examples have been updated...
>
>     Let me also say that I have done a number of more fundamental
>     changes in the synsem module in agreement with John. Fortunately,
>     these are rather conceptual changes and have little impact on the
>     actual way the model will be used. In fact, from the structure
>     these changes are quite backwads compatible both with what we had
>     so far as well as with the original lemon model.
>
>     Let me explain a bit the rationale for this....
>
>     It has been clear that there has been quite some discussion on the
>     SemanticFrame class and in particular whether there is such a
>     thing as a semantic argument in the model and whether semantic
>     arguments are distinct from each other...
>
>     It seems to me that the main issue has been that the SemanticFrame
>     class has been interpreted differently as it was supposed to.
>     Essentialy, this class was supposed to represent the bindings of
>     arguments of ontological predicates to the syntactic arguments
>     they are realized by. However, I agree that the name
>     "SemanticFrame" makes one think about "Frames" in the tradition of
>     Framenet, which actually in our case would play the role of
>     ontological "references" rather than of Lexical Senses.
>
>     Further, it was indeed awkard to say that a SemanticFrame is a
>     subclass of LexicalSense.
>
>     Thus, John came up with a proposal I like quite a lot and which I
>     have implemented in the wiki, ontology and examples already. The
>     proposal consists in renaming a few classes to make their actual
>     role and function better graspable and to avoid confusion with
>     other related but not equivalent concepts. So here is the proposed
>     renaming:
>
>     SemanticFrame -> OntoMap (reflecting that it actually specifies
>     how the ontological arguments of a predicate "map" to syntactic
>     arguments of a syntactic frame and the other way round; this thus
>     more or less corresponds to the SynSemCorrespondence in KMF).
>
>     SemanticArgument -> obsolete (not needed anymore)
>
>     Syntactic Argument and Syntactic Frame -> stay as they are
>
>     semArg -> ontoCorrespondence (to make clear that it establishes a
>     correspondence between an ontological argument and a syntactic
>     argument)
>
>     subframe -> submap (to be consistent with renaming SemanticFrame
>     as OntoMap)
>
>     I hope you all agree with these changes. Please review them
>     carefully. We will have chance to discuss them on the 17th of Juli
>     where we will have the final telco on the model.
>
>     I send a separate email to remind us all of the upcoming
>     discussion on the LIME module this week.
>
>     Kind regards,
>
>     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/