On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Nuno Cardoso <[email protected]> wrote:
> - The DBpedia ontology is really a great resource, but I find it a little > unbalanced -- it could use more subclasses, some of them are really strange > (for instance, why Women Tennis Association Tournament as the only subclass > from Sports Events? Why does it need a subclass of its own? Shouldn't it > also have other subclasses?) Are you planning on revising it? I have my own > couple of suggestions to make... The DBpedia ontology is based on Wikipedia infoboxes, so its coverage mirrors those of the infoboxes. Which means it sometimes doesn't make sense from a top-down perspective, but on the other hand it is grounded in actual modeling of instances by the Wikipedia community, which makes it far more useful than most other ontologies (IMO). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com _______________________________________________ Dbpedia-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
