- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:13:02 +0200
- To: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: SWBPD list <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Guus Schreiber wrote: > > All, > > You can find an editor's draft of the "as-is" conversion of WordNet to > RDF/OWL at: > > http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark/wn/wn-conversion.html > > The document has links to WordNet schema file, the corresponding > instance files, and the conversion program (from the WN Prolog source > to RDF/OWL, using SWI-Prolog). > > This will be input for the ftf discussions on WN. > Ah, great to see this :) One point re "Brickley represents the hyponym relationship as a |rdfs:subClassOf|. This is an attractive interpretation, but we argue that not all hyponyms can be interpreted in that way."... I felt licensed to map wordnet hyponym into RDF classes because the wordnet documentation said that hyponym is only used when two terms fit into the following template: "A ____ is a kind of ___". While I did find some cases (in v1.6 at least) where terms didn't seem good as classes, they also seemed to fail on Wordnet's own internal documentation rules. I think "Paris" is (or was) an example. BTW could you also cite http://xmlns.com/2001/08/wordnet/ from the references -- it is the same piece of work begun in the 1999 post, but from an new URL that is in use and the page is even occasionally updated... cheers, Dan > Guus > > PS Mark has officially joined SWBPD today. :)
Received on Monday, 17 October 2005 16:12:53 UTC