[PragmaticWeb] [DBpedia-discussion] Call for Ontology Editor demos for DBpedia

Thu Jul 6 21:03:51 CEST 2017

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 at 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 at ontology2.com>
>> Para:        "John Flynn" <jflynn12 at verizon.net>, "'Sebastian Hellmann'"
<hellmann at informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, "'semantic-web at W3C'" <
semantic-web at w3c.org>, 'public-lod' <public-lod at w3.org>, 'DBpedia' <
Dbpedia-discussion at 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 at verizon.net>
>> To: "'Sebastian Hellmann'" <hellmann at informatik.uni-leipzig.de>;
"'semantic-web at W3C'" <semantic-web at w3c.org>; "'public-lod'" <
public-lod at w3.org>; "'DBpedia'" <Dbpedia-discussion at 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) 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
>>
>>
>> From: Sebastian Hellmann [mailto:hellmann at 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) to another ontology editor and started to
collect requirements/tools here:
>>
>>
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 '\(http://schema.org\|
http://www.wikidata.org\|http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org\)' >
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/.
>>
>> 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
>>
>> Thank you for your help!
>>
>> [1] 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://nlp2rdf.org,
http://linguistics.okfn.org, https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt
>> Homepage: http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann
>> Research Group:
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 at 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."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de/pipermail/pragmaticweb/attachments/20170706/64863dea/attachment.html>