RE: OntoLex minutes 9/Apr/18

Hi Philip,

14:00 CET on the 30th is fine for me.
As for the discussion on Dictionary Entry, I agree with you on this.

Kind regards,
Katrien


Lic. Katrien Depuydt
senior onderzoeker/taalkundige
senior researcher/linguist
+31 (0)71 527 2479 +31 (0)6 53627318 / kamer 104

/instituut voor de Nederlandse taal/
Rapenburg 61 / 2311 GJ / Leiden
Postbus 9515 / 2300 RA / Leiden

www.ivdnt.org




Van: Philipp Cimiano [mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de]
Verzonden: donderdag 19 april 2018 8:29
Aan: public-ontolex@w3.org
Onderwerp: Re: OntoLex minutes 9/Apr/18


Dearl all,

 thanks to John for the minutes and to Julia for the detailed response to Sander.

Personally, I am not convinved about renaming "DictionaryEntry" to "SuperEntry". First "DictionaryEntry" says nothing about whether a dictionary is printed.
According to WIkipedia: A dictionary, sometimes known as a wordbook, is a collection of words<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word> in one or more specific languages<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language>, often arranged alphabetically<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphabetical_order> (or by radical and stroke<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical-and-stroke_sorting> for ideographic<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideographic> languages), which may include information on definitions<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition>, usage, etymologies<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymologies>, pronunciations<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pronunciation>, translation, etc.[1]<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary#cite_note-Web1-1> or a book of words in one language with their equivalents in another, sometimes known as a lexicon<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicon>.[1]<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary#cite_note-Web1-1> It is a lexicographical<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicography> product which shows inter-relationships among the data.[2]<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary#cite_note-2>

The relevant terms are: collection and most importantly to me "lexicographical product which shows inter-relationships among data". I quite like this. A dictionary is primarly a conscious and deliberate arrangement of lexical entries / words into collections, making lexicographic choices what to group, etc. The word "product" makes clear that a dictionary is an artifact that makes choices on how to present / group and describe language. It is a meta-object.

The view of a dictionary as a lexicographic product which shows inter-relationships among the data is fine for our purposes. We could in fact even use this definition for our module. Under this definition it would be more than appropriate to call our object DictionaryEntry.

I am fine with having one property describes with multiple (defined) ranges.

Other than that, I would like to propose that we have our next telco on the 30th of April, if possible at 14:00 CET. Leet me know if this works out.

Kind regards,
Philipp.

Am 09.04.18 um 17:13 schrieb John McCrae:
Hi Julia,

Yes that is certainly what I meant to say :)

Regards,
John

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Julia Bosque Gil <jbosque@fi.upm.es<mailto:jbosque@fi.upm.es>> wrote:
Hi all,
Just a minor clarification for a line in the minutes from today:

'SuperEntry' is a better name than 'LexicalEntry' -->  'SuperEntry' is a better name than 'DictionaryEntry'

Cheers,
Julia

2018-04-09 14:38 GMT+02:00 John McCrae <john.mccrae@insight-centre.org<mailto:john.mccrae@insight-centre.org>>:
Hi all,

The minutes from today are below:

Present: Julia, Francesca, Ilan, John

https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Lexicography

Issues raised by Sander:
JBG: Use of two properties describesEntry and describesSense, but dictionaries describe much more than entries and senses.
JBG: Single describes property with multiple range?
JBG:Is this sufficient to capture the structure of a dictionary
JM: Probably sufficent, but some risk of not capturing all dictionaries
One property with multiple ranges may be more flexible than multiple properties
Technical distinction between ranges of 'describes' but is there a semantic distinction?
JM: probably technically okay to have a single property
JBG: SuperEntry of subEntry?
JM: I think this is an error in my minutes. It should be SuperEntry
FF: We aren't representing a digital version of a print dictionary, so is dictionary entry the right name?
JBG: if a dictionary entry only has senses for nouns ontolex core is sufficient. however the dictionary has senses for multiple pos I must use DictionaryEntry. The use of dictionary entry implies the existence of a paper dictionary.
JM: super entry is like an 'entry group' (as previously proposed) so perhaps SuperEntry is a better name
FF: shows that lexical entries do not occur by themselves
IK: what is meant by typographical? what is the purpose of lexicography module?
aims is to represent linguistic information (JM: broadly true)
JBG: yeah, some things are not linguistic, but somehow logical, e.g., sense orderings
JBG: In next telco we should repeat the goal of the module

Key Points:
'describe' as a property with multiple ranges is acceptable
'SuperEntry' is a better name than 'LexicalEntry'
goal of OntoLex is not same as TEI

IK: how this relates to dictionaries. What about senses, when many lexicographers (e.g., Kilgariff) reject them?
JBG: we provide enough tools to represent dictionaries
JM: OntoLex is quite opinionated as to what 'entries' and 'senses' mean, so we need to bridge this with other representations
IK: Looking at future goals is important too. 'SuperEntry' is more forward-looking

Next Telco:
23rd is difficult for some so postpone to 30 Apr, 13:00 CEST.

Regards,
John


--

Julia Bosque Gil
PhD Student
Ontology Engineering Group<http://www.oeg-upm.net/>
Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid




--

--

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<mailto:cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>



Office CITEC-2.307

Universitätsstr. 21-25

33615 Bielefeld, NRW

Germany

________________________________

----------------------------------------------------------
Aan dit bericht kunnen geen rechten worden ontleend.
Het bericht is alleen bestemd voor de geadresseerde.
Indien het bericht niet voor u is bestemd, verzoeken wij
u dit aan ons te melden en het bericht te verwijderen.

This message shall not constitute any obligations.
This message is intended solely for the addressee.
If you have received this message in error, please
inform us and delete the message.
----------------------------------------------------------