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

Agenda for tomorrow's ontolex call

From: Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 23:47:35 +0200
Message-ID: <555E5277.7000609@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
To: "public-ontolex@w3.org" <public-ontolex@w3.org>
Dear all,

  here is the list of issues to discuss tomorrow for the synsem module, 
summarizing all the comments received:

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? -> added to the agenda 
for tomorrow

2) Rethink example 10

3) Example 17: is supposed to show how to use denotes and evokes. We 
could change the IATE concept.

4) I agree that the definition of semantic frame could be simplified. I 
propose we adop the ones proposed by John:

*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) Examples 5 and 6: I think they are important to show people how to 
use the model also in more complex cases. I strongly argue to keep them! 
Examples are key to make people adopt the model. Many things are not 
understandable from the descriptions alone...

6) Example 8 uses isA but should be made clearer.

7) In the definition you use the words "subjects" and "objects" at 
plural: not sure, if it more appropriate to use the singular form.

8) I fear that the use of the inverseOf construct could be not very 
readable. A simpler solution could be simply use "fatherOf", although I 
suspect that this name does not conform with current best practices.

9) Renaming Frame to "Syntactic Frame" is indeed an option that we could 
consider tomorrow.

10) Introduce subclasses of Argument: Syntactic Argument and Semantic 

11) Opening film example: add more prepositions (of, at, for) and make 
the argument optional.

12) Change alma mater example: graduate from -> studied at

And here are the access details:


Talk to you tomorrow!


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
Received on Thursday, 21 May 2015 21:48:05 UTC

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