Re: [DBpedia-discussion] Call for Ontology Editor demos for DBpedia

Question: isn't it possible to 'aggregate' classes of subjects in respect
to the properties / predicates some set of subjects have in common.
Example: a Person class subjects would have 'birthPlace', 'birthDate' and
'name' properties and an Artist subclass would have those properties of
Person plus 'creatorOf' properties of artworks objects. So a superclass
would have a superset of the properties of a subclass.

Sorry for my ignorance. Best,
Sebastian.
On Jul 6, 2017 3:30 PM, <jaccoud@petrobras.com.br> wrote:

> Virtus in medium est.
>
> I agree that by any standard, the DBpedia Ontology is messy, and needs
> some work. Otherwise, it would be only a list of concepts with almost no
> relations between them. These relations (the subconcept hierarchy and other
> relevant relations defined by the authors of the ontology) need to be there
> if the ontology is to be useful to something more than mere documentation..
>
> However, a well sound ontology needs a LOT of work, and the wider the
> scope, the harder it is to get it right. Since DBpedia has no scope
> boundaries, the amount of work to select a suitable  foundational ontology
> and expand it would be huge. No, I'm not quoting Trump, it is really huge..
>
> What DBpedia needs is a few abstract notions without commitment to any
> foundational ontology, since the tradeoffs each FO makes would hurt DBpedia
> genericity. For example, different groups may fight years about an exact
> definition of "Software", but most will agree it is a intelectual product,
> such as a romance, a song or a theater play. The ontology should reflect
> that, without getting in details about how software is encoded, versioned,
> reified etc., since these details are important only to applications
> dealing with the concept of software, and not for DBpedia itself.
>
> A few months ago, I complained that ComputerLanguage was not a subconcept
> of Language, and it was promptly corrected, since it is very hard do
> disagree with that. There are a lot of places where such refactoring is
> needed, and I think it would help a lot. Further refining, such as creating
> subclasses of ComputerLanguage, should be avoided in the name of keeping
> the ontology simple and generic. Upper-level classes are needed to sort
> things out, but one should also avoid defining things like disjointness
> because it would lead to stuff like partition completeness and other stuff
> which are clearly not needed for the purposes of DBpedia.
>
> But I agree a cleanup is needed, since a lot of dbo:Things don't make much
> sense.
>
> *Cheers.*
> =============================================
> Marcelo Jaccoud Amaral
> Petrobras, Brazil
> =============================================
>
>
>
>
>
> De:        "Paul Houle" <paul.houle@ontology2.com>
> Para:        "John Flynn" <jflynn12@verizon.net>, "'Sebastian Hellmann'" <
> hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, "'semantic-web at W3C'" <
> semantic-web@w3c.org>, 'public-lod' <public-lod@w3.org>, 'DBpedia' <
> Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Data:        2017-07-06 12:25
> Assunto:        Re: [DBpedia-discussion] Call for Ontology Editor demos
> for DBpedia
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> I would disagree.
>
> The DBpedia Ontology is not designed to support any specific kind of
> reasoning.
>
> What it *is* designed to do is capture the somewhat structured data that
> exists in Wikipedia.  Following the much misunderstood "semantic web",  the
> emphasis is on properties first,  and then classes second.  Think of it as
> a set of baseball or Pokemon cards;  the point is not to replicate or even
> closely describe the performance or rules of the game,  but to go after the
> long hanging fruit of "things that are easy to ontologize."
>
> There is a real price to pay for this;  from the viewpoint of conventional
> application development and introductory computer science,  the data is not
> always factually correct or satisfies the invariants required for a
> particular algorithm.  Practically that means that you might ask for "US
> States" and get 48 or 51,  that somebody like Barry Bonds or Mel Gibson has
> their career much better represented than J. Edgar Hoover or J. Eric S.
> Thompson,  and you would probably find that the "tree of life" in DBpedia
> is not really a tree.
>
> If you need to reasoning in some domain you need to find some area you are
> willing to pump the entropy out of,  create the data structures appropriate
> for what you want to do,  and possibly incorporate data from DBpedia,
>  doing whatever cleanup is necessary.  That's not different at all from the
> situation of "doing reasoning over reasoning over data collected by a large
> organization".
>
>
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "John Flynn" <*jflynn12@verizon.net* <jflynn12@verizon.net>>
> To: "'Sebastian Hellmann'" <*hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de*
> <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>>; "'semantic-web at W3C'" <
> *semantic-web@w3c.org* <semantic-web@w3c.org>>; "'public-lod'" <
> *public-lod@w3.org* <public-lod@w3.org>>; "'DBpedia'" <
> *Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net*
> <Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>>
> Sent: 7/5/2017 11:43:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [DBpedia-discussion] Call for Ontology Editor demos for
> DBpedia
>
> I have long been curious about the DBpedia ontology structure so I just
> took a look at the ontology represented in (
> *https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/375401/dbo_no_mappings.nt*
> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/375401/dbo_no_mappings.nt>) as
> referenced in the email below.
> I normally start the evaluation of an ontology by looking at the top-down
> class relationships. So, I did a search for the classes that were listed as
> a direct subclass of owl#Thing to get a general idea of the organization of
> the DBpedia class structure.
> To say the least, I was sorely disappointed. Here are a few of the DBpedia
> classes that are direct subclasses of owl#Thing: Food, Media, Work, Blazon,
> Altitude, Language, Currency, Statistic, Diploma, Award, Agent,
> PublicService, Disease, GrossDomesticProdutPerCapita, ElectionDiagram,
> Demographics, Relationship, Medicine, List, BioMolecule. I gave up after
> this small sample. It is obvious that the DBpedia community needs to worry
> a lot more about the structure of the ontology itself rather than focusing
> on selecting a new editor. A working group needs to be established to go
> back to the drawing board and look at the DBpedia ontology form the top
> down. It certainly doesn't make much sense as it is currently structured.
>
> John Flynn
> *http://semanticsimulations.com* <http://semanticsimulations.com/>
>
>
> *From:* Sebastian Hellmann [mailto:*hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de*
> <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 05, 2017 10:43 AM
> *To:* 'semantic-web at W3C'; public-lod; DBpedia
> *Subject:* [DBpedia-discussion] Call for Ontology Editor demos for DBpedia
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> we are preparing a switch from the mappings wiki (
> *http://mappings.dbpedia.org* <http://mappings.dbpedia.org/>) to another
> ontology editor and started to collect requirements/tools here:
>
>
> *https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HwtJJ3jIlrQAPwHYhvpw4a4Z4hZorTGaZTB8Bq8Y-TI/edit*
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HwtJJ3jIlrQAPwHYhvpw4a4Z4hZorTGaZTB8Bq8Y-TI/edit>
>
> We already have a demo for Webprotege thanks to Ismael Rodriguez, our GSoC
> student. As we are lacking time and resources, we will probably only
> consider editors with a running demo, so the community can try it.
> Our main interest is of course to manage the DBpedia core ontology and
> push any mappings to other ontologies in separate files. So we provide a
> core version for demo purposes created with:
> rapper -g dbpedia_2016-10.nt | grep -v '\(
> *http://schema.org\|http://www.wikidata.org\|http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org\*
> <http://schema.org/%7Chttp:/www.wikidata.org/%7Chttp:/www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/>)'
> > dbo_no_mappings.nt
>
> *https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/375401/dbo_no_mappings.nt*
> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/375401/dbo_no_mappings.nt>
> (I hope that the regex didn't kick out anything essential or broke any
> axioms...)
>
> We would be very happy, if anyone from the semantic web community would
> make a demo with their favorite editor and add a link to the Google Doc and
> post a short message on the DBpedia discussion list[1] or on slack
> *https://dbpedia.slack.com/* <https://dbpedia.slack.com/>.
>
> This would help us to make a more informed decision. The next DBpedia Dev
> online meeting will be on 2nd of August 14:00 (each first Wednesday per
> month). Presentations of editors are also welcome. We will also discuss the
> editor question during the DBpedia meeting in Amsterdam, co-located with
> SEMANTiCS on 14.9. *http://wiki.dbpedia.org/meetings/Amsterdam2017*
> <http://wiki.dbpedia.org/meetings/Amsterdam2017>
>
> Thank you for your help!
>
> [1] *https://sourceforge.net/projects/dbpedia/lists/dbpedia-discussion*
> <https://sourceforge.net/projects/dbpedia/lists/dbpedia-discussion>
>
> --
> All the best,
> Sebastian Hellmann
>
> Director of Knowledge Integration and Linked Data Technologies (KILT)
> Competence Center
> at the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) at Leipzig University
> Executive Director of the DBpedia Association
> Projects: *http://dbpedia.org* <http://dbpedia.org/>, *http://nlp2rdf.org*
> <http://nlp2rdf.org/>, *http://linguistics.okfn.org*
> <http://linguistics.okfn.org/>, *https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt*
> <http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt>
> Homepage: *http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann*
> <http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann>
> Research Group: *http://aksw.org* <http://aksw.org/>---------------
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot______
> _________________________________________
> DBpedia-discussion mailing list
> DBpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
>
>
>
>
>
> "O emitente desta mensagem é responsável por seu conteúdo e endereçamento.
> Cabe ao destinatário cuidar quanto ao tratamento adequado. Sem a devida
> autorização, a divulgação, a reprodução, a distribuição ou qualquer outra
> ação em desconformidade com as normas internas do Sistema Petrobras são
> proibidas e passíveis de sanção disciplinar, cível e criminal."
>
>
>
> "The sender of this message is responsible for its content and addressing..
> The receiver shall take proper care of it. Without due authorization, the
> publication, reproduction, distribution or the performance of any other
> action not conforming to Petrobras System internal policies and procedures
> is forbidden and liable to disciplinary, civil or criminal sanctions."
>
>
>
> "El emisor de este mensaje es responsable por su contenido y
> direccionamiento. Cabe al destinatario darle el tratamiento adecuado. Sin
> la debida autorización, su divulgación, reproducción, distribución o
> cualquier otra acción no conforme a las normas internas del Sistema
> Petrobras están prohibidas y serán pasibles de sanción disciplinaria, civil
> y penal."
>