- From: John P. McCrae <jmccrae@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 13:40:20 +0100
- To: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it>
- Cc: "<public-ontolex@w3.org>" <public-ontolex@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAC5njqqyi8V4zTmBS6ryQ0ZOt_iMnTzcmAW+K5e_9dPFvBepaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Aldo, I agree the synset should be a concept, we will fix this example this week. I am not sure why the lexical sense does not point to W3C wordnet... weirdly the deployed version does: http://wordnet-rdf.princeton.edu/wn31/102124272-n Regards, John On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@cnr.it> wrote: > Hi all, I spotted a misleading axiom in the wordnet example from Ontolex > wiki page ( > https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#WordNet_in_OntoLex.2FLemon > ): > > <#1-n> a ontolex:LexicalSense ; > wordnet-ontology:gloss "feline mammal usually having thick soft fur > and no ability to roar: domestic cats; wildcats"@eng ; > wordnet-ontology:lex_id 0 ; > wordnet-ontology:old_sense_key "cat%1:05:00::" ; > wordnet-ontology:sense_number 1 ; > wordnet-ontology:tag_count 18 ; > ontolex:reference <http://wordnet-rdf.princeton.edu/wn31/102124584-n> > ; > owl:sameAs <http://lemon-model.net/lexica/uby/wn/WN_Sense_574>, > <http://www.lexvo.org/page/wordnet/30/noun/cat_1_05_00> . > > There we say that a lexical sense (apparently the wordnet word sense > cat_1, declared as the same as other senses from other RDF versions of > Wordnet (btw why not also the official ones made for w3c and by Amsterdam?) > has ontolex:reference a synset from wn31. > > Technically there is nothing horrible about claiming that a wordnet sense > references an ontology entity that is also a/its wordnet synset, but let me > say this this is massively confusing for most people :). > > In fact, the Core says that the relation between senses and synsets is the > one between lexical senses and concepts: “ontolex:isLexicalizedSenseOf”. I > expect to get that one, even if the sense exemplified there is not said to > be from wn31 necessarily. > > Instead, with ontolex:reference we probably want to show a real example of > linking between lexical linked data and mundane ontologies, so why don’t we > use a normal class such as: > > http://sw.opencyc.org/2012/05/10/concept/en/Cat > http://umbel.org/umbel/sc/Cat > http://dbpedia.org/resource/Cat > > Best > Aldo >
Received on Monday, 23 March 2015 12:40:53 UTC