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:hellm...@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\
 
<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 <http://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@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion

Reply via email to