W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ontolex@w3.org > July 2018

RE: Inconsistent capitalization of "multiwordexpression" between the specification and the ontology

From: Armando Stellato <stellato@uniroma2.it>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 15:16:45 +0000
To: John McCrae <john.mccrae@insight-centre.org>, public-ontolex <public-ontolex@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DB6PR1001MB10136968BFE38CC7FB8609CCC75C0@DB6PR1001MB1013.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Dear John,

that’s the same practical consideration I had. On the other side it is a pity to have a term mistyped (let’s say, overCamelCased :D ) just because it has been overlooked in the ontology.

I would propose this (if you and others agree and if it is possible do to this change in a reasonable time)


·        Replace-all MultiWordExpression with MultiwordExpression (that is the definition and mentions)

·        Add a @deprecated MultiWordExpression class which is owl:equivalentClassOf MultiwordExpression so all old data importing the new version of the ontology(ies) will remain consistent, but any new client will know that they should use the proper name

Cheers,

Armando



From: John McCrae <john.mccrae@insight-centre.org>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 4:13 PM
To: public-ontolex <public-ontolex@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Inconsistent capitalization of "multiwordexpression" between the specification and the ontology


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: John McCrae <john.mccrae@insight-centre.org<mailto:john.mccrae@insight-centre.org>>
Date: Mon 16 Jul 2018, 16:08
Subject: Re: Inconsistent capitalization of "multiwordexpression" between the specification and the ontology
To: Manuel Fiorelli <manuel.fiorelli@gmail.com<mailto:manuel.fiorelli@gmail.com>>

Hi Manuel,

Thanks for this. It probably should be MultiwordExpression like in the specification, but I think it is easier to change the specification than the ontology. So I would propose we keep the ontology and use MultiWordExpression.

Any other opinions?

Regards,
John

On Mon 16 Jul 2018, 15:59 Manuel Fiorelli, <manuel.fiorelli@gmail.com<mailto:manuel.fiorelli@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear all

I've just spotted an inconsistency between the specification (https://www.w3.org/2016/05/ontolex/#lexical-entries<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2016%2F05%2Fontolex%2F%23lexical-entries&data=02%7C01%7C%7C49377246f13245ab4b3608d5eb29bce5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636673486843419425&sdata=nyGAnhwqw0a3O7e%2FX%2B%2BYp6znn037oySdfgxKlY6DxyE%3D&reserved=0>) and the ontology (https://www.w3.org/ns/lemon/ontolex.rdf<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fns%2Flemon%2Fontolex.rdf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C49377246f13245ab4b3608d5eb29bce5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636673486843419425&sdata=BvkiyfLSPum0OyQtT%2BzuFCc%2BAPfgHV3CKW6erafl89E%3D&reserved=0>):

  *   the specification contains ontolex:MultiwordExpression (the word "word" is lower case)
  *   the ontology contains ontolex:MultiWordExpression (the word "Word" is upper case)
I don't know whether the specification or the ontology should prevail in such cases, but for sure if I follow the specification my "multi word expressions" will be missclassified by an ontology reasoner.

Without delving into the general case, in this specific situation which alternative is the right one?

--
Manuel Fiorelli
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2018 15:17:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:37:02 UTC