Fwd: [lexidma] Updated diagram for OntoLex in LEXIDMA

Hi Michal,

Ar Domh 19 IÃil 2020 ag 13:57, scrÃobh Michal Mechura <Michal.Boleslav.Mechura@ijs.si>:

Hi John,

Excuse me if I'm uninformed (I'm new here) but I'm not sure if I
understand correctly how to read your diagram. I do understand this:

- The boxes are types.
- Most of the type names are sef-explanatory to me (but see questions 2,
3, 4, 5 below).
- When a box is inside another another box it's an "is-a" relation.

Yes, those are subtypesÂ

- The lines between the boxes are relations between instances of those
types.

They are RDF triples, I did not include property namesÂ

That much is clear and makes sense to me. But then:

Question 1: Do I assume correctly that the lines are one-to-many "has-a"
relations, from one "haver" to many "havees" in the direction of the
arrow?

I didn't put in any cardinality restrictions, there are some obviouslyÂ

Question 2: What's a 'Lexicographic Component'?

That is our terminology for an element that models the recursive structure of a dictionaryÂ

Question 3: What's a 'Reference'? (From the diagram, it's something a
Sense has, and it has a Definition).

A reference is a language-independent reference in a non-lexicographic resource, such as an ontology, encyclopedia or knowledge graph.

Question 4: In 'Citation (WIP)', what's "WIP"?

Work In ProgressÂ

Question 5: 'Usage' probably means labels such as "archaic", "vulgar",
"such-and-such dialect" and so on, right?

Yes, that is what I am referringÂto.

Question 5: 'Morphosyntactic Properties' is in the diagram twice (two
boxes). Are those two different types (and should they have different
names then) or are they one and the same type (and should they be just
one box then)?

They are the same, I just wanted to avoid some unnecessary arrows.Â

Question 6: What do the background colours of some of the boxes mean?
The green, blue and purple (if that's what it is).

I was trying to make clear which elements belong to only the entry (blue), only the sense (purple) or either (green).

Question 7 (probably my most important one): How do instances of the
types actually contain data? Is each of them just a single string (an
Example is a string, a Translation is a string etc.)? Or does each type
decompose further into something like attributes/properties/children
which are not shown in the diagram? If it's the former (= each instance
is a single string) then I'm surprised not to see more relations between
the boxes; for example, an Example should be allowed to have
Translations, a Collocation should be allowed to have Examples. If it's
the latter (= there exist attributes which are not shown in the diagram)
then I'd be curious to see them; I guess such details will need to be
made specific in the eventual standard we are going to produce.

The diagram is quite simplified so I skipped most of the details here. Some of them can have labels attached to them, or in some cases, there is more sophisticated modelling that is fully described in the specification. The diagram is really only meant to give a high-level overview of the elements we have in the model, so we can be clear about a minimal set of requirements for LEXIDMA.

Regards,

John

These are honest fact-finding questions, by the way. I just want to be
able to read the diagram as it was intended. The other diagram, the ER
one tha MiloÅ made, I don't have any lack of clarity there because I
"speak" ER and because I was involved in the debates from which it
emerged.

Thanks!
M.

On 2020-06-25 15:04, John P. McCrae wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I created an updated diagram for the LEXIDMA work based on the key
> elements of the OntoLex model that are of relevance to the group.
>
> Some points
>
> 1/ We do allow recursion but only of a single very specific element
> called the "lexicographic component". This is mostly due to the way
> that the lexicographic module was added on top of the core model
> 2/ Most of the elements are allowed on either the entry or the sense
> except for definitions, usages (which may not be good), collocations
> (also maybe not quite right), and etymology. Language is also not
> allowed on forms (it is assumed to be inherited from the entry).
>
> Regards,
> John

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.Â Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

lexidma message