Re: Question about lexinfo and ontolex

Hello Noé,

Thanks for your email and interest in the model.

On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 at 20:01, Noé Gasparini <noe.gasparini@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Ontolex members,
>
> I am glad to have an opportunity to get in touch you all, but with a
> question to start.
> I am just joining the domain of ontology with a background in fieldwork
> linguistics and enthusiastic lexicography in Wiktionary, plus English is
> not my mother tongue, so excuse me if I sound a little odd sometimes.
>
> So, I am part of a dictionary project for French language based on French
> Wiktionary data and other materials collected and digitized. This project,
> funded by a branch of the ministry of Culture of France, will be developed
> by an external provider and it aims to be an app to read several
> dictionaries and a contributive platform to gather information and comments
> about the language. One of the main feature will be to manage definitions
> based on geographical information and semantic domains preferences.
>
Sounds interesting. Perhaps you would be interested in the ELEXIS
<http://elex.is> project, which has similar goals in creating lexical
resources.

>
> We are at the stage of ontology design. With Jean Delahousse, a semantic
> web consultant, we explored Lemon, Ontolex-Lemon, Lexinfo and Dbnary. We
> are interested to use Lexinfo as backbone ontology. We now have some
> difficulties to understand how to map a LexicalEntry with several POS.
>
The "LexicalEntry" class in OntoLex-Lemon is limited by definition to a
single part-of-speech. If you want to create entries with multiples
parts-of-speech, you should look into the recently developed lexicography
module:

https://jogracia.github.io/ontolex-lexicog/

> We can't figure out how to connect lexinfo:PartOfSpeech with
> lemon:LexicalSense. Lexinfo website says a version 3.0 is ongoing, based on
> Ontolex-Lemon rather than Lemon. We imagine it may helps us to map our
> data, so are you going well with this version? May we have some insight on
> the ongoing development? It might be simpler for our project to use the
> oncoming version of the ontology.
>
LexInfo 3.0 is still under development and, in reality, is still waiting
for significant input to be developed further. Most people still use the
2.0 ontology and for the time being I would see this as the most likely way
forward.

>
> Thanks for your help, we'll keep you inform about the project and let ask
> for your advice about the localisation information we will add on several
> classes to manage the provenance and geographical contexte of the words and
> definitions..
>
I think there are many in this group who would be very interested in this.

Regards,
John

>
> Best regards,
>
> Noé Gasparini
> Institut international pour la Francophonie
> Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3
>