W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2015

RE: [Dbpedia-ontology] [Dbpedia-discussion] Advancing the DBpedia ontology

From: John Flynn <jflynn12@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:14:31 -0500
To: "'M. Aaron Bossert'" <mabossert@gmail.com>,?<vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
Cc: "'dbpedia-ontology'" <dbpedia-ontology@lists.sourceforge.net>, "'Linked Data community'" <public-lod@w3.org>, "'SW-forum'" <semantic-web@w3.org>, <dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>, "'John Flynn'" <jflynn12@verizon.net>
Message-id: <035d01d05169$f59c46e0$e0d4d4a0$@net>
It seems the first level effort should be a requirements analysis for the
Dbpedia ontology.
- What is the level of expressiveness needed in the ontology language- 1st
order logic, some level of descriptive logic, or a less expressive language?
- Based on the above, what specific ontology implementation language should
be used?
- Should the Dbpedia ontology leverage an existing upper ontology, such as
- Should the Dbpedia ontology architecture consist of a basic common core of
concepts (possibly in addition to the concepts in a upper ontology) that are
then extended by additional domain ontologies?
- How will the Dbpedia ontology be managed?
- What are the hosting requirements for access loads on the ontology? How
many simultaneous users?

This is only a cursory cut at Dbpedia ontology requirement issues. But, it
seems the community needs to come to grips with this issue before
implementing specific changes to the existing ontology.

John Flynn

-----Original Message-----
From: M. Aaron Bossert [mailto:mabossert@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:13 AM
To: <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
Cc: dbpedia-ontology; Linked Data community; SW-forum;
Subject: Re: [Dbpedia-ontology] [Dbpedia-discussion] Advancing the DBpedia


I'm thinking of trying to do some stats on the existing ontology and the
mappings to see where there is room for improvement.  I'm tied up this week
with a couple deadlines that I seem to moving towards at greater than light
speed, though my progress is not.

As soon as I get the rough cut done, I'll share the results with you and
maybe we can discuss paths forward?

I'm with you on the 30% error rate...that doesn't help anyone.


Received on Thursday, 26 February 2015 02:15:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:41 UTC