On 12/28/2011 12:28 PM, Patrick Cassidy wrote:
>
>The way an ontology *should be* is the way it will be most useful to those
> who intend to use it.
One trouble is that 'useful' depends on the use. Knowledge base A
might be able to attain hyperprecision easily for task B, but only give
Hi Yury
Thank you. Using the OFFSET statement, it means I can do as following after the
result is sorted.
For example to get the third row:
LIMIT 1
OFFSET 3
Best regards
Samir
De : Yury Katkov
À : Samir Bilal
Cc : "dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.n
Hi!
If I understand correctly you need to use OFFSET statement.
-
Yury Katkov
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Samir Bilal wrote:
> Hi,
> Is it possible to do ranking in SPARQL, to get a row given its rank from
> an ordered result. For example for the first row we can
> use ORDER BY
I have had similar problems with the size of DBpedia. A simple solution is
to find the downloads that you are interested and filter out the
triples using grep. If I am interested in the article category
"Butterflies" and I suspect there are useful triples in the
article_categories
download I can us
Tom,
Thanks for the feedback:
[TM] > You could create an ontology as it "should" be or you
> can use an ontology which matches the practices and conventions used
> by the Wikipedia editors. The latter is going to be messy in many
> ways, but at least it'll have a large quantity of data to
Hello,
on the index.sh script to index DBpedia Spotlight there is a instruction I do
not know what means it, and didn't find information about it.
The instruction is as follows:
# train a linker (most simple is based on similarity-thresholds)
*mvn scala:run
-DmainClass=org.dbpedia.**spotlight.e
