Re: OntoLex minutes 9/Apr/18

Hi, John, all:

14:00h CEST works fine for me, too.

I'll take this opportunity to announce an update of the Lexicography page.
Since spring is advancing and we mentioned that it would be nice to have a
draft of the module by summer, if I am not mistaken, I figured that a brief
summary of the content everyone provided in telcos, minutes and emails
since end of 2017 would be useful to remind us where we are in terms of
decisions concerning the module elements. You can find it at

https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Lexicography#Telcos_from_December_2017_to_May_2018

I added a new figure at the end of that section to illustrate those
decisions. If you just missed the last telcos, scroll down to the section
March-April 2018 to catch up on the last discussion about DictionaryEntry
vs. SuperEntries and details on where that discussion comes from:

https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Lexicography#March_--_April_2018

Also, as the goal of the module was not formally written yet and there were
questions and comments on it scattered through our minutes, I made a first
attempt at drafting it from the content everyone has provided in the
different channels since last summer. If you agree, we can polish it from
here through the email thread :)

Goal:

Model existing dictionaries in a * lemon*-OntoLex compliant way by
> providing a conceptual/abstract model for lexicographical resources in
> general: build a common space in which entities such as "entry",
> "dictionary sense", etc. can be agreed and commonly defined. This will be
> done in a way in which we abstract from specific linguistic views so that
> the new module remains highly reuseable across dictionaries (independently
> of their lexicographic tradition) as well as useful for new linked
> data-based ones.  By doing this, we bridge the gap between OntoLex
> commitments to what 'entries' and 'senses' are in other representations. In
> fact, we can consider this some kind of "compatibility module" that allows
> us to deal with many existent resources.
>


I hope this helps in giving a brief overview of the work in the module
elements so far.

Best regards and talk to you soon,

Julia


2018-04-30 11:49 GMT+02:00 John McCrae <john@mccr.ae>:

> Hi all,
>
> Just to clarify when this meeting will be today. I initially announced
> 13:00 CEST, but it seems Philipp in his last mail changed this to 14:00
> CEST, is this okay with everyone?
>
> Regards,
> John
>
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Philipp Cimiano <
> cimiano@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>>  I have not heard any complaints, so I assume we will e-meet next Monday
>> 30th of April at 14:00 CET.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Philipp.
>>
>> Am 23.04.18 um 11:59 schrieb Katrien Depuydt:
>>
>> 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
>> <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>
>> 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>:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> 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.
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> 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