ISOcat and RELcat, two cooperating semantic registries

TY - CONF

T1 - ISOcat and RELcat, two cooperating semantic registries

AU - Windhouwer, Menzo

AU - Schuurman, I.

PY - 2014/1/17

Y1 - 2014/1/17

N2 - In ISOcat, a data category registry, metadata and linguistic concepts are defined. In order to prevent a proliferation of entries, the components of a complex tag are defined, not the full tags themselves. I.e., instead of one definition for a CGN-tag like /VG(neven)/, definitions for its components /conjunction/ (VG) and /coordinate/ (neven) are entered, the profit clearly being avoidance of definitions for more complex tags, like /N(soort,ev,basis,zijd,stan)/, one of the representations of a 'soortnaam' (common noun). After all, many (most?) of these fine-grained tags are unlikely to be reuseable in other languages.But having broken up these tags, we nevertheless want to be able to relate our components /conjunction/ and /coordinate/ with entries like /coordinate conjunction/ or /coordinating conjunction/, or /noun/ and /common/ with /common noun/.This can be done in RELcat, in which ontological relations, like sameAs, almostSameAs, partOf, superclassof, can be defined. Thus far, this has been done for one-to-one relationships. For CGN, more complex instantiations are needed. First, the relevant CGN-components are to be combined, and next, this combination is to be related to another ISOcat concept. And what about the full tags? Are they entailed in the relation as well?In this presentation we will answer these questions and show how different granularity levels can be tackled to enable the possibilities for semantic crosswalks.

AB - In ISOcat, a data category registry, metadata and linguistic concepts are defined. In order to prevent a proliferation of entries, the components of a complex tag are defined, not the full tags themselves. I.e., instead of one definition for a CGN-tag like /VG(neven)/, definitions for its components /conjunction/ (VG) and /coordinate/ (neven) are entered, the profit clearly being avoidance of definitions for more complex tags, like /N(soort,ev,basis,zijd,stan)/, one of the representations of a 'soortnaam' (common noun). After all, many (most?) of these fine-grained tags are unlikely to be reuseable in other languages.But having broken up these tags, we nevertheless want to be able to relate our components /conjunction/ and /coordinate/ with entries like /coordinate conjunction/ or /coordinating conjunction/, or /noun/ and /common/ with /common noun/.This can be done in RELcat, in which ontological relations, like sameAs, almostSameAs, partOf, superclassof, can be defined. Thus far, this has been done for one-to-one relationships. For CGN, more complex instantiations are needed. First, the relevant CGN-components are to be combined, and next, this combination is to be related to another ISOcat concept. And what about the full tags? Are they entailed in the relation as well?In this presentation we will answer these questions and show how different granularity levels can be tackled to enable the possibilities for semantic crosswalks.

M3 - Poster

ER -