[open-linguistics] Linguistic LOD cloud - help needed, now is the time to submit your data set

[Sebastian Hellmann]

Hi John,

Am 02.08.2012 15:19, schrieb John McCrae:
> Hi all,
>
> I decided to do an independent evaluation of what was in the LLOD, to
> identify what needs to be done, and found that the situation isn't perhaps
> as bad as the previous email suggests.
Sorry, John. The only thing you did is soften the criteria for 
inclusion. That doesn't make the data better. You even went so far as to 
disregard the criteria superimposed by the current practice:
http://richard.cyganiak.de/2007/10/lod/#how-to-join
CKAN entry is required, if not then "fail".

> My notes are here:
>
> http://wiki.okfn.org/Working_Groups/linguistics/Resources_in_the_cloud
Well, that is a nice table, but rather pointless. Please concentrate on 
maintaining the group resources at:
http://thedatahub.org/en/group/linguistics
or
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlMk5ouIspH1dGx1R1Rnd1ZXX0xmLXppSWFrcm0wNFE&authkey=CJi9u78D&authkey=CJi9u78D#gid=0

>
> The following resources appeared to be acceptable (i.e., they exist, have
> RDF, contain some useful data and had links to some other resource or to
> data categories)
softening criteria
>
>     - Cornetto
>     - WOLD
>     - W3C WordNet
>     - DBPediaWiktionary
>     - LemonWiktionary*
>     - LemonWordNet*
>     - Open Data Thesaurus**
>     - DBPedia**
>     - YAGO
>     - Localized DBPedias**
>     - OpenCyc
>     - GOLD***
>     - ISOcat***
>     - Lexvo
>     - Lingvoj
>     - Glottolog/LingDoc*
>
> * Sebastian has indicated that these resources may be buggy. There are no
> issues here <http://code.google.com/p/mlode/issues/list> that make them
> unusable however so I count them as good.
LemonWiktionary and Glottolog have 18 issues total, which is good.
Sebastian Nordhoff already fixed 4 bugs for Glottolog, making it much 
better and removing the "fail".
Let's work on the data, not lowering expectations.
> ** DBpedia and Open Data Thesaurus are not primarily linguistics resources,
> should they be included in the LLOD cloud?
My definition would include "anything that is useful for NLP" as well.
Besides you have redirects.
> *** IMHO categories and schematic information resources are vital part of
> the LLOD cloud, I can't understand why Sebastian suggests they should not
> be included!?
copying behaviour from http://lod-cloud.net/
We can do schemas extra, if you want to.
> The following resources need to be entered into CKAN: (6/27)
> <snip>
>     
> The following resources should be removed (at least for the time being)
> from the cloud diagram: (5/27)
> <snip>
>
> The following resources need attention: (4/27)
> <snip>
That is a total of 15, I counted 18.

> So In summary out of the 27 bubbles in the LLOD cloud 17 are usable and 4
> can likely be quickly fixed. I have attached a version of the LLOD cloud
> with these results attached. Please edit the Wiki page if you feel I have
> got something wrong.
Please concentrate on editing CKAN  or the Google spreadsheet and submit 
your data set to Google code
We are working on creating updates of the cloud based on CKAN.
@John, please read:
http://richard.cyganiak.de/2007/10/lod/#how-to-join
http://wiki.okfn.org/Wg/linguistics/llod#How_to_contribute
LemonWordnet for example needs 50 links to an existing resource. Jimmy 
O'Regan was so kind to create that for you:
http://code.google.com/p/mlode/issues/detail?id=34

Kind regards,
Sebastian


-- 
Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
Events:
   * http://sabre2012.infai.org/mlode (Leipzig, Sept. 23-24-25, 2012)
   * http://wole2012.eurecom.fr (*Deadline: July 31st 2012*)
Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://dbpedia.org
Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
Research Group: http://aksw.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-linguistics/attachments/20120803/5e8d05d0/attachment-0001.html>