Re: Teleconference tomorrow at 14:00 CET

Hi,

Here are some minutes from the call:

Present: Philipp Cimiano, Julia Bosque-Gil, Manuel Fiorelli, Francesca
Frontini, Fahad Khan, John McCrae, Elena Montiel, Jorge Gracia, Sander
Stolk, Morris Alper, Ilan Kernerman, Thierry Declerck
Apologies: Francis Bond


   - [PC] Focus of telco is on using model for representing existing
   dictionaries
   - [PC] Propose introduction of Dictionary and DictionaryEntry, to group
   distinct lexical entries/senses that would be under the same headword
   - Dictionary headwords ("entries") often contain multiple
   part-of-speech, gender, pronunciations
      - But not always, e.g., OED
   - Criteria for dividing lexical entries are not clear in traditional
   dictionaries
   - [FF?] How does this affect etymology?
      - [JM] Depends on outcome of diachronicity module
   - [IK] Is the purpose of OntoLex to model existing dictionaries or
   should OntoLex dictionaries be "LD-native"?
      - Modelling existing dictionaries accurately risks incompatibility
   - [MA] Do we assume each dictionary entry contains a distinct set of
   lexical entries?
      - [JM] Add axiom that a lexical entry is part of at most one
      dictionary entry?
      - [FK] Axioms are frequently ignored. See the requirement that each
      sense must have one reference
         - [JM] This should be revised
      - [SS] A dictionary entry should be described by the entries it
      contains
   - [JG] Original goal of dictionary entries is to be composed of LEs and
   capture a "view of the dictionary"
   - [TD] Some dictionaries (e.g., Dictionary of Bavarian Dialects)
   captures a lot of information on the head word for space reasons, this is
   not a problem for OntoLex
   - [JM] Goal of OntoLex is not to accurately represent dictionaries but
   be useful for applications such as NLP
      - [FF] We should consider not just use cases in NLP, but also other
      areas such as DH
   - [TD] Decomposition should also refer to senses
      - [JM] A property should be added to support this
   - [JB] Prefer dictionary entry as a container for lexical senses.
   - [JM] Why not two classes, one for lexical senses and one for entries?
      - [PC] Why not use the same class for both?
         - [JM,JG,MA] This could make things difficult technically

Summary

   - Propose new link from decomp:Component -> ontolex:LexicalSense (to be
   named)
   - Introduce a new class grouping lexical entries/lexical senses. Either:
      1. DictionaryEntry as a group of lexical senses
      2. DictionaryEntry as a group of lexical entries
      3. DictionaryEntry as a group of lexical senses and/or lexical entries
      4. LexicalDictionaryEntry [?] as a group of lexical entries and
      SenseDictionaryEntry [?] as a group of lexical senses.
   - Next Meeting: 5th September 14:00 CET (12:00 UTC)

Regards,
John


On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Philipp Cimiano <
cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>  the details for the teleconference tomorrow at 14:00 CET can be found
> here:
>
> https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Teleconference,_
> 2017.7.24,_14-15_pm_CET
>
> @Julia: can you point to everyone to the examples in the wiki that we
> can discuss tomorrow? Thanks!
>
> Talk to you tomorrow.
>
> Greetings,
>
> 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
>
>
>