A final set of issues with the specification

Hi all,

I made a thorough read-through of the specification and have some comments.
There are five points that may be controversial and another *few* that
should not be.

*Important points*

1. We do not given the abbreviation of "lexicon model for ontologies" as
"lemon" although the term lemon is used at several points in the document.
Do we agree that the model is called "lexicon model for ontologies" and
abbreviated as "OntoLex-Lemon"?

2. ontolex/example12 is very difficult to understand now that we have named
this property "context" and not "usage". The idea that "riviere" can be
extended with a usage note "A riviere is a river that flows into the sea"
makes sense but it is not clear why the usage note is called a "context"...
we need to either clearly justify this or rename the property to "usage". I
prefer the latter option. (see also point 28)

3. The vartrans:category "property indicates the specific type of a
relation", we already have a property to do this namely rdf:type! It is not
clear to me from the text why we need to redefine this property. (i.e.,
either we need to better justify this or drop this property)

4. Lime defines a number of properties that are of the form "the number of
links from X to Y divided by the total number of X" for example
lime:avgNumOfLexicalizations is "the number of links from references to
lexical entries divided by the total number of references". This can be put
into a table as follows:

X/YReferencesEntriesConceptsReferences-avgNumOfLexicalizationsavgNumOfLinks
Entriespercentage-avgAmbiguityConcepts?avgSynonymy-


The table reveals a few inconsistencies in that we have a missing property
and the percentage property should perhaps be named something like
avgPolysemy

5. As the NIF "community" has not responded to our questions, we are forced
to drop recommendations of linking using NIF, and instead only recommend
OpenAnnotation.

*Not-so-important points*

(JPM) means I will try and fix them within the next two weeks

6. "Document is structured into eight sections" only there are nine (JPM)

7. The first paragraph of the introduction is very academic, perhaps it
could be rewritten to be more appealing to a general audience. (JPM)

8. "sublcass" and a number of other basic spelling errors exist throughout
the document. We must spell-check the document! (JPM)

9. ontolex/example4 uses "/" around the IPA representations of the terms. I
don't think that this is necessary. We should also explain the language tag
and reference the IANA subtag catalogue.

10. There is little consistency about whether we write "lexical entry" or
"LexicalEntry" or use a fixed-width font. (JPM I prefer the real English
'lexical entry')

11. Similarly we should check that terms like "rdfs:label" are always
fixed-width (JPM)

12. "with canonical form the noun" !? (JPM)

13. ontolex/example6 seems to duplicate ontolex/example1

14. We need an example showing how we represent abbreviations relative to
their full forms (JPM)

15. In the definition of "other form" we should probably not say
"non-dictionary" but "non-lemma". (JPM)

16. ontolex/example10 is still not good. The "bank" part of the example
makes no sense as it is two separate entries with separate meanings, but it
is not well explained why "bank" is two entries. The second part of this
example uses the word "apothecary", which is a highly unusual word in
English and I would not (personally) say is truly synonymous with
"pharmacist". I had suggested using "troll" as the example here, but that
seems not to have been adopted. Perhaps we also need a separate example
explaining "bank" here too? (JPM)

17. ontolex/example12 is listed in the text as synsem/example12! (JPM)

18. Terms like 'Lexicon' and 'Lexical Entry' should not be capitalized they
are not proper nouns (JPM)

19. The lexical concept can be better explained as follows: The reference
in the ontology primarily gives an interpretation of a word in terms of the
identifiers that would be generated by the semantic parsing of the
sentence. For example if we were to understand the query "when did John
Lennon die?" we may understand the word "die" as generating the URI
dbpedia:deathDate within a SPARQL query. In contrast many resources will
also wish to record the intentional meaning of the word with the mental
lexicon, such as "die" referring to the concept of death, for this reason
we introduce the class lexical concept which can be evoked by a lexical
entry in place of or as well as a denotation in the ontology, e.g.,

   :die a ontolex:Word ;
     ontolex:denotes dbpedia:deathDate ;
     ontolex:evokes  wordnet:Dying .
(JPM)

20. Capitalization in definition of OntoMap is wrong. (JPM)

21. I don't like the paragraph 'An OntoMap resembles the
SynSemCorrespondence...' as
The OntoMap does not really resemble synsemcorrespondence
I don't think we should compare to a closed standard like LMF that is
unfamiliar to most of our audience
Talking about semantic arguments will only create more confusion

22. All "dbpedia:" URIs should be fixed width (JPM)

23. Some examples use "dbonto" and some "dbpedia"... inconsistent. (JPM)

24. "The verb (to) launch" needs quotation marks (JPM)

25. "Complex ontology mappings / submappings" talks about semantic
arguments but this is confusing

26. Indentation of synsem/example8 needs to be fixed (JPM)

27. "If element x decides if x"... this is not a maths paper, use English.
(JPM)

28. condition is defined as a subproperty of usage (JPM, see point 2)

29. "not found in many other languages" => "not found in some other
languages and more importantly in some ontologies" (JPM)

30. I am not sure from a linguistic point of view that it is correct to say
that "otitis" is composed of the affix "itis" in decomp/example3. In
particular there is no Spanish word "ot" and "-itis" is a Greek inflection
not a true suffix. An easier example would be with a normal prefix such as
"un-", "re-" or "dis-"...

31. It appears that order information has been added to decomp/example6...
this is not necessary if we know that order of the words from the main
entry and this representation actually saves a triple (ergo IMHO is
superior!)

    :AfricanSwineFever a ontolex:MultiwordExpression ;
      rdf:_1 African_node ;
      rdf:_2 Swine_node ;
      rdf:_3 Fever_node .

32. "adjective -> adverb variation" not sure what "minus greater than"
means here. (JPM change to arrow)

33. "Translation" section lists the "following ways [of representing
translation] of increasing ontological strength"... but they are clearly
not increasing! I am not really sure what ontological strength means.

34. The diagram for lime metadata needs to be updated. (JPM)

35. lime/example2 "jnp" => "jpn" (JPM)

36. I have a comment on "Verb form mood" that appears to never have been
answered. I assume that my merge has no objections. (JPM)

Regards,
John