I'm loading dbpedia ontology type assignments from 3.5.1 into my system and noticing a significant number of subjects that don't have labels... Here are just a few I saw going by:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Fiat_1300/1500__1295_cc_OHV_I4> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/AutomobileEngine> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Fiat_1300/1500__1295_cc_OHV_I4> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Device> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Fiat_1300/1500__1481_cc_OHV_I4> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/AutomobileEngine> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Fiat_1300/1500__1481_cc_OHV_I4> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Device> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Adventuress_%28schooner%29__ADVENTURESS__Schooner_Yacht> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Place> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Adventuress_%28schooner%29__ADVENTURESS__Schooner_Yacht> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/HistoricPlace> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Jos%C3%A9_Antonio_Delgado__Mountaineer> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/PersonFunction> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Imogen_Lloyd_Webber__Author> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/PersonFunction> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Gary_Mule_Deer__Actor_Comedian_musician> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://dbpedia.org/ontology/PersonFunction> . Some interesting stuff seems to be going on here, and I'd like to see it better documented For a long time there's been the problem that some named entities have their own DBpedia resource and others don't because of the accidental nature of how things work on Wikipedia. Here's an example of two fictional characters that play an isomorphic role in two very similar works: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailor_Mars http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes!_PreCure_5#Cure_Rouge The perfect "generic database" would treat these two entities in the same way... And it looks like dbpedia is starting to address this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_1300 has two engines listed in the Infobox, and it appears the extractor is parsing the "name" of the engine to extract some nice facts: http://dbpedia.org/page/Fiat_1300/1500__1295_cc_OHV_I4 On the other hand, this one looks like http://dbpedia.org/resource/Adventuress_%28schooner%29__ADVENTURESS__Schooner_Yacht doesn't have such clear value... It seems to be identifying a "facet" of the boat, that is, its career as a part of the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. The value of this isn't so clear to me, but perhaps there is some sense to it. The oddly named dbpedia-owl:added field applies to this career, so maybe this makes sense. The two PersonFunctions up there look specious, particularly because I don't see dbpedia-owl:Writer dbpedia-owl:Actor dbpedia-owl:Comedian dbpedia-owl:MusicalArtist anywhere near the Person or PersonFunction instances. That said, I do see some places where "PersonFunction" has promising roles to play: the functionEndData and functionEndYear properties are obviously useful. There's an issue of how these new "synthetic" identifiers (that don't correspond 1-1 to wikipedia pages) map to external resources. "PersonFunction" is similar (but probably not equivalent) to the "Employment Tenure" CVC in Freebase. Certainly some of these new synthetic identifiers correspond to resources in Freebase as well, since Freebase sometimes splits wikipedia topics into multiple entities. Note also looking at http://mappings.dbpedia.org/server/ontology/classes/PersonFunction I see a lot of properties that just don't make any sense at all, such a "wavelength", "sourceConfluenceMountain", "shipDraft". I don't know if this some artifact of how the whole system works (looks like these properties all have a domain of "owl:Thing") but it does shock my sensibilities. (From a strictly owl wavepoint, I guess that something that has a "wavelength" is a thing, but by that standard, anything that has any property at all is a "Thing") ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Dbpedia-discussion mailing list Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
