Re: Next skype call on 24th of October, 14:00 CET

HI all,

I suggested another version that follows the existing specification
https://www.w3.org/2016/05/ontolex/

We wrote that

"A *lexical sense* represents the lexical meaning of a lexical entry when
interpreted as referring to the corresponding ontology element"

And in contrast

"we would like to express the fact that a certain lexical entry evokes a
certain mental concept rather than that it refers to a class with a formal
interpretation in some model. Thus, in lemon we introduce the class *Lexical
Concept*"

Thus, in my interpretation, senses in traditional dictionaries should
always be modeled as lexical concepts.

Lexical sense has always been quite a technical concept, and honestly I
think calling it 'lexical sense' has created much confusion (way back in
the first Lemon model I had proposed to call it a *sememe)*. I think we
need to make a clear and unambiguous definition of lexical sense, that
precludes its usage without an ontological reference, as this is how it is
defined both in the final specification and in the OWL code (*reference
exactly 1*).

I have created a flowchart (for discussion, attached) to try and explain
(IMHO) the differences between senses, concepts and references.

I also noted that there is no need to define a new example object if it
only has an rdf:value, in this case using a single skos:example triple is
both more compact and inter-operable.

Regards,
John

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Julia Bosque Gil <jbosque@fi.upm.es>
wrote:

> Hi, Philipp, all:
>
> We have a first draft of the RDF for Francesca's PLI *verre, **mousse, *
> and *estomaquer *examples in the shared document
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TogPjrLyJS0OK5pzww28751MX7179-NzCIsDdzae65o/edit>.
> Francesca, Fahad and I were working on it the other day, but some things
> are still unclear to us (marked in red color and with comments on the
> margin).
>
> *Summary:*
>
> - Lexical definitions are included at the LexicalSense level and the
> encyclopedic one at the LexicalConcept level (I seem to remember this was
> suggested during our last telco)
> - The decomp module is used to relate *maison de verre, petite verre,
> etc. *to *verre*.
> - At the end of the RDF you'll see how option 3' (from the ones we
> discussed in September), with DictionaryEntries and
> DictionaryEntryComponents, could be applied here if we wanted to record
> that both the lexical entry *verre* as well as *maison de verre, petite
> verre, *etc. belong to the same dictionary entry, and the latter are not
> considered dictionary entries themselves in the PLI.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Julia
>
>
> 2017-10-22 18:08 GMT+02:00 Philipp Cimiano <cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.
> de>:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>>  we agreed to have our next regular ontolex skype call next Tuesday,
>> 24th of October at 14:00 CET.
>>
>> We will do the call by skype.
>>
>> I will not be available as I am currently attending the ISWC conference
>> in Vienna, but John agreed to lead the teleconference.
>>
>> The main outcome could be to provide a proposal for how to model the
>> Petit Larousse examples provided by Francesca during the teleconference
>> last week.
>>
>> Did anyone manage to have a look and try to provide some RDF code that
>> can be discussed during the telco next Tuesday?
>>
>> I have cleaned up a little bit the minutes from the last skype call:
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Teleconference,_20
>> 17.10.10,_15-16_pm_CET
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Julia Bosque Gil
> PhD Student
> Ontology Engineering Group <http://www.oeg-upm.net/>
> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
>