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

Re: Minutes teleconference last Friday

From: Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 22:18:35 +0200
Message-ID: <555E3D9B.4090909@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
To: Elena Montiel Ponsoda <emontiel@fi.upm.es>, public-ontolex <public-ontolex@w3.org>
Elena,

   not sure if I understand correctly:

Are you proposing to replace:

"The class *lexical sense* represents the lexical meaning of a lexical 
entry when interpreted as referring to the corresponding ontology 
element. A link between a lexical entry and an ontology entity via a 
LexicalSense object implies that the lexical entry can be used to refer 
to the ontology entity in question under corresponding connotations, 
pragmatic implications and meaning nuances that might no be directly 
modeled in the ontology. These pragmatic conditions and meaning nuances 
can be attached to the LexicalSense object, which represents a 
reification of the pair of LexicalEntry and ontology element. The 
Lexical Sense thus uniquely determines a lexical entry and an 
ontological entity it is associated with."

with:

“Via the lexical sense object we can attach additional properties to a 
pair of lexical entry and the ontological predicate that it denotes to 
describe under which conditions (context, register, domain, etc.) it is 
valid to regard the lexical entry as having the ontological entity as 
meaning. For example, we may wish to express the usages of the word 
"consumption" in terms of the topic and the diachronic usage of the word.”

???

Where is the part with the lexical meaning, the reification of the pair 
of lexical entry and ontology elements, etc. etc.

Are you proposing to remove this? This is not appropriate in my view as 
you are emphasizing the fact that the sense is mainly for attaching 
additional properties while it is *mainly* for reifying the relation 
between a lexical element and the ontology element it denotes. The fact 
that one can attach additional conditions is an effect of this.

If you think it helps, I can try to simplify the definition a bit. 
Should I ?

Regards,

Philipp.


Am 13.05.15 um 12:47 schrieb Elena Montiel Ponsoda:
> Dear Philipp,
> Please find the definition for Lexical Sense below:
>
> “Via the lexical sense object we can attach additional properties to a 
> pair of lexical entry and the ontological predicate that it denotes to 
> describe under which conditions (context, register, domain, etc.) it 
> is valid to regard the lexical entry as having the ontological entity 
> as meaning. For example, we may wish to express the usages of the word 
> "consumption" in terms of the topic and the diachronic usage of the word.”
>
> Regards!
>
>
> El 11/05/2015 a las 10:32, Philipp Cimiano escribió:
>> Dear all,
>>
>>  ok, I think I have implemented all changes so far.
>>
>> I am missing:
>>
>> 1) Definition of Lexical Sense (Elena/Lupe)
>> 2) John: can you please regenerate the figures for the examples, 
>> execution of create_images.sh stops due to missing rdflib on my 
>> machine, thanks!
>> 3) Definition of LexicalizationSet, will copy from the lime module
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Philipp.
>>
>> Am 11.05.15 um 09:04 schrieb Philipp Cimiano:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>>  I summarize the outcomes and decisions made during the telco last 
>>> Friday:
>>>
>>> 1) Domain of ontolex:language
>>>
>>> We decided to unconstrain the domain of ontolex:language and instead 
>>> add a = 1 ontolex:language axiom to the ontolex:Lexicon, 
>>> ontolex:LexicalEntry and lime:LexicalizationSet classes. The doman 
>>> of ontolex:language would thus be OWL:thing
>>>
>>> 2) Form should have minimum one writtenRep with range rdf:langString
>>>
>>> 3) The range of ontolex:language should be rdfs:Literal
>>>
>>> 4) We should drop the constraint on there being just one written 
>>> representation per language tag as this is questionable and further 
>>> it can not be axiomtaized in OWL anyway.
>>>
>>> 5) Example 10 is infelicitous as there should be two lexical entries 
>>> for "bank" as in the case of geographic vs. financial meaning this 
>>> is a case of homonymy. So in this case there should be two lexical 
>>> entries. I will correct the example.
>>>
>>> 6)  Example 9: for the sake of this example I will change the 
>>> denotation to <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Marriage>
>>>
>>> 7) We decided to keep dct:subject as property to assign a topic to a 
>>> sense as this is the corresponding property from Dublin Core for this:
>>>
>>> 8) We decided to change the definition of affix to:
>>>
>>> "The class affix represents is a morpheme (suffix, prefix, infix, 
>>> circumfix, etc.) that is attached to a word stem to form a new word."
>>>
>>> 9) We decided to change the definition of lexical entry to:
>>>
>>> "Lexical Entry is a unit of analysis of lexicon, that consist of a 
>>> set of forms that are grammatically related and a set of base 
>>> meanings that are associated with all of these forms. Thus, a 
>>> lexical entry is a word, multiword expression or affix with a single 
>>> part-of-speech, morphological pattern, etymology and set of senses."
>>>
>>> 10) We agreed to have domain and ranges for all properties, so I 
>>> will add also owl:Thing to the range of "reference" for the sake of 
>>> completeness (we discussed this differently during the telco, but to 
>>> ensure consistency I propose we indeed explicitly indicate the range 
>>> here, same for isSenseOf).
>>>
>>> 11) We decided to rename the property "condition" to "usage" and add 
>>> it to the core module.
>>>
>>> 12) We briefly repeated the rationale for declaring a Lexicon as a 
>>> dataset.
>>>
>>> TODOs:
>>>
>>> Elena/Lupe: to send me the updated definition of "Lexical Sense"
>>> John: fix the namespaces
>>>
>>> That's it for now. Thanks to all those who attended the telco.
>>>
>>> I will implement these changes today.
>>>
>>> The next telco will be on the 22nd of Mai, 16:00 CET. We will 
>>> discuss the synsem module then.
>>>
>>> I will send an email on this soon.
>>>
>>> Kind 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 Thursday, 21 May 2015 20:19:10 UTC

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