W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ontolex@w3.org > May 2015

Re: synsem module ready

From: John P. McCrae <jmccrae@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 16:57:14 +0200
Message-ID: <CAC5njqoR6NW4WC+PZWphUnPr0W-Nyp32C0Re+Wd6KC3J-CEwVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Manuel Fiorelli <manuel.fiorelli@gmail.com>
Cc: Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>, "public-ontolex@w3.org" <public-ontolex@w3.org>

I read through the spec and there are a few major issues I detected in the
first couple of sections sections (ontolex + synsem)

1. The definition of 'other form' still says '[Other form] should be ....
an abbreviation, short form or acronym'. This is incorrect and contradicts
the definition of lexical entry. Can we add an example clarifying the
representation of abbreviations?
2. ontolex/example10 now doesn't make any sense... 'bank' is just two words
each with a different meaning. Can we change this to a word with genuine
polysemy... I suggest 'troll' (1 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll>, 2
3. ontolex/example17 doesn't really show a lot and for some reason refers
to IATE for 'cat'!? (this is probably my fault...). Could we switch it to
'spouse'/'marry' showing that these two lexical entries have two different
concepts but the same reference dbpedia:spouse
4. The definition of semantic frame is at best confusing, I really don't
think we need to bring Gestalt Theory into this as well. My attempt would

*Semantic Frames* are the meaning of a word (and hence are also lexical
senses) but expressed by one or more ontological predicates and their
arguments. This sense of the word can only be understood when all of its
required arguments are realized.

Similarly we need to change subframe to

*Subframe *relates a complex semantic frame to frames for each of the
individual ontological predicates that form the complex semantic frame.

5. synsem/example5 and example6 are essentially the same as example4 but
they connect an eventive verb ('graduate' or 'die') with a consequential
fact ('almaMater' or 'deathYear'). This is of questionable soundness
although we have argued in papers it is valid when the event and the
consequence are in a strict bijection... still, I would prefer to drop this
for the spec as it adds a lot of unnecessary complexity.

There are a lot of other minor issues I will change directly in the spec.


On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Manuel Fiorelli <manuel.fiorelli@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Dear Philipp, All
> you can find my comments on the synsem module below.
> In Example synsem/example2, the resource :own_frame_transitive is wrongly
> written :own_form_transitive.  Additionally, there are two usages of
> owl:subPropertyOf, which instead  should be rdfs:subPropertyOf.
> The class synsem:SemanticFrame is declared to be subclass of
> ontolex:LexicalSense; however, in the picture representing the synsem
> module, the arrow representing this axiom is oriented in the opposite
> direction.
> In the paragraph "Semantic Frames", there is a table headed "Type",
> "Predicate", "Example", whose first row contains *City(x)*, ?x rdf:type
> ontology:Person: should it be ?x rdf:type dbpedia-owl:City?
> There is no example (just below the definition of synsem:isA)about the
> representation of unary predicates. Nor is there any example about the
> representation of individuals.
> The definitions of synsem:{subj|obj}OfProp use the following wording:
> "...property represents the semantic argument with represents"
> I would avoid a sequence of two "represents". Moreover, I think that
> "with" should be "that".
> In Example synsem/example3, there is again owl:subPropertyOf.
> Also, In Example synsem/example4, there is again owl:subPropertyOf.
> In the section "Complex Senses / Semantic Frames", there is the definition
> of synsem:subframe, while in the figure there is the property
> synsem:subsense.
> Just below Example synsem/example7, there is an example involving the
> property father: the property should point to the child; however, the
> name of the property suggests to me that the object is the father (just in
> the same manner skos:broader points to the broader of a given concept).
> I think that Example synsem/example9  should be explained in more detail.
> I didn't find the definition of synsem:propertyDomain and
> synsem:propertyRange; then, I realized that they were moved to the core
> module. The diagram of the core module must be updated to include these
> properties, as well as the diagram of the synsem module to remove them.
> I noticed that in the infobox providing the definition of propertyRange
> and propertyDomain, the URI still uses the synsem namespace instead of the
> core ontolex namespace.
> Finally, I noticed a typo in the definition of ontolex:LexicalEntry:
> "The class lexical entry represents a unit of analysis of the lexicon that
> consist of a set of forms that are grammatically ... "
> It should be "that consists" with an append "s".
> Best Regards
> Manuel Fiorelli
> 2015-05-13 21:47 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano <
> cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>:
>> Dear all,
>>  I have been working on finalizing the synsem module, please check:
>> https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Final_Model_Specification#Syntax_and_Semantics_.28synsem.29
>> The next telco to discuss the synsem module will be on Friday the 22nd of
>> Mai, 16:00 CET.
>> Please send me any issues to discuss or comments on the synsem module by
>> Thurday 21st of Mai at the very latest.
>> Thanks and best regards,
>> 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
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2015 14:57:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:36:49 UTC