- From: Christian Chiarcos <christian.chiarcos@web.de>
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 23:02:28 +0100
- To: Bettina Klimek <klimek@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Cc: public-ontolex <public-ontolex@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAC1YGdiB6VjXTeOfTOR0BG8EDBSzpozKhfox06z81WhupxFtiw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Bettina, thanks a lot for the minutes. Quick question: Any place where we can deposit examples? I would like to put some emphasis on the Old High German dictionary of Splett ( https://books.google.de/books?hl=de&lr=&id=sbsgAAAAQBAJ) because of its richness. For example, it provides tree structures rather than just morpheme-level features. (While this would be an interesting feature for NLP, as well, Splett is a traditional philologist without any ties to computation.) Best, Christian Am Fr., 23. Nov. 2018 um 22:40 Uhr schrieb Bettina Klimek < klimek@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to share with you the minutes of the first telco regarding > the morphology module. Unfortunately, many people who liked to participate > could not join, so it was only Julia, Max, Jorge and me exchanging our > thoughts on the central issue for the next telcos, i.e. what is the > purpose/content of the module? Below I copied the minutes for you: > > Minutes: > > Julia: > > Assumed that module should be glue between mmoon and ontolex > > Would like Bettina to create reduced version of mmoon as starting point > > Max: > > Still issues and examples that need to be taken into account in modelling > > Have flex and toolbox data - share it please > > Jorge: > > Collect representation needs that justifies adding this module > > MMoOn very large and complex - try to produce minimal modules covering the > maximum > > Julia: are issues in Wiki issues found in dictionaries (contradiction to > issues listed afterwards)? > > At which linguistic levels do these issues generally occur (lexical, > syntactic level)? > > Max: yes in arabic dictionaries word-forms are listed as well > > Bettina: narrow scope to lexicographic needs or open widen scope to > grammatical and morphological analysis? > > Max: against wide scope. Just representation of morphemes in relation to > lexical entries, don’t represent meanings of morphemes in the module rather > point to sense outside of module > > The opinions refer to point #3 in the following document: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TmPIIugIBGGjakC62esTNIq6O6FQl4cl_wwsyEp6LYU/edit?usp=sharing > where I copied John's definition of the purpose from the wiki page ( > https://www.w3.org/community/ontolex/wiki/Morphology) that served as a > starting point. > > We all agreed that this is an import issue which requires more community > input. *Even if you cannot join the calls, please, share your thoughts, > expectations and requirements that you personally see as the purpose of > this module.* At the moment we are collecting also every kind of example > data (RDF and non-RDF) that you would like to share or that illustrates > what kind of needs you have regarding the content and modelling. Send your > example data to me via e-mail and I will collect everything in an extra > document which we can use as the basis for the discussion for the future > telcos. > > Also, I would like you to know that I drafted the procedure I am planning > to follow in the creation of this new OntoLex module. You can find it in > the document link above. > > Looking forward to your input on the purpose of the module and your > example data :) > > All the best, > > Bettina > > > -- > Bettina Klimek > PhD Student > Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig > Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) > Goerdelerring 9 > 04109 Leipzig > > Research Group: http://aksw.org/Groups/KILT > Homepage: http://aksw.org/BettinaKlimek > Projects: http://mmoon.org, http://linguistics.okfn.org > Events: 12th May 2018 "LDL 2018 : 6th Workshop on Linked Data in Linguistics (LDL-2018): Towards Linguistic Data Science" > http://ldl2018.linguistic-lod.org/ > >
Received on Saturday, 24 November 2018 22:03:03 UTC