Web Ontology (jamie)
Domains & Types » jamie » Web Ontology » Discuss

Discussions on Web Ontology

Filtersonly show threads also posted in:

  1.  

    Web Ontology (RDF possiblites)

    also posted to
    7 posts, latest post: narphorium, Aug 6, 2008
    Link to discussion
    1. alexbl
      Jun 13, 2008
      alexbl says:

      Hey,

       It looks like you have some pretty neat little modeling projects going on. I especially like the social domain you have, because it ties into why I'm writing this post in the first place. :)

       Obviously, you seem to have an interest in RDF, so I would highly recommend that you take a look at Jamie Taylor's web_ontology type (http://www.freebase.com/view/user/jamie/web_ontology/ontology). There will probably be some schema changes soon (including a type with the freebase equivalence) and hopefully the schema will be made to reflect RDFS more closely. Basically the idea is to model the relationship between an RDF schema and (a) freebase schema(s). This combined with some tooling, will make it possible to both import and export RDF, and since RDFS is RDF itself, make it possible to easily add new schemas (with someone coming in and filling in the freebase equivalence entries for it). 

      2. sandos
        Jun 14, 2008
        sandos says:

        Ah, the foaf ontology looks especially interesting.

      3. alexbl
        Jun 14, 2008
        alexbl says:

        Which is why I started by mentioning your Social domain ;)

      4. doconnor
        Jun 24, 2008
        doconnor says:

        http://clockwerx.blogspot.com/2008/06/how-to-extract-useful-owl-from-freebase.html is kinda relevant to this discussion

      5. narphorium
        Aug 4, 2008
        narphorium says:

        I've been playing with some RDF mapping in my own domain as well. It's similar to jamie's but with a few extra features.

      6. jamie
        Aug 5, 2008
        jamie says:

        Shawn - this is really cool.  You really took this to the next level.  I especially like the  ontology_attribute_mapping taking not only a property but a type (indicating when the property mapping applies.  Alexb suggested this to me a while back - but I never got around to adding it!)

        I'm not sure that I fully appreciate the ontology_class_mapping connecting with general Freebase Topics.  Do you have a specific use in mind for that relationship?

        One thing I had toyed with (on sandbox a few months ago) was adding the ability to map not just  Freebase to other ontologies, but allowing multiple ontologies to be mapped together. I think it begs for ontology properties to be represented as objects themselves that can be linked together.

        Have you written any code against this? 

        I'd love to collaborate on this if you are interested and see if we can get a larger community involved (and using it!)

        Jamie

      7. narphorium
        Aug 6, 2008
        narphorium says:

        Thanks Jamie, I really got inspired by the domain you created.

        The reasons why I linked equivalent classes to topics are two-fold. First, I  wasn't able to create reverse properties from a Type as easily as I could to my own Ontology Class type. More importantly though, I wanted to link multiple ontologies together as well as with Freebase.

        By linking classes to topics, it means that you can search for a topic like Country and get a list of equivalent ontology classes from many different ontologies. My intention was that these topics would then by typed as Type/Domain Equivalent topics as many of them already are. You can also leverage the Also Known As property of those topics to help map ontologies together. As you mentioned, it would probably be a good idea to do something similar for properties.

        Ideally I would like to map Freebase to UMBEL because they have mappings to Cyc, Dbpedia and other ontologies. I am starting to write some code to help map the 1,300 or so top level Freebase Types onto the 20,000 UMBEL concepts but that will take some time.

        I'd be happy to do what I can to get more people using Freebase as a common ground for ontology mapping.



    Discussion is posted in:

    Think this discussion also relates to something else? Cross-post it by adding a new discussion area:

  2.  

    Ontology Type

    1 post, latest post: narphorium, Jul 17, 2008
    Link to discussion
    1. narphorium
      Jul 17, 2008
      narphorium says:

      Would it be possible to add a property to the Ontology type so that you can define equivalent types the same way that you can define equivalent properties?

      For example, you could map the foaf:Person class to the /people/person type.



    Discussion is posted in:

    Think this discussion also relates to something else? Cross-post it by adding a new discussion area:

Start a New Discussion

Discussion will be posted in:

Think this discussion also relates to something else? Cross-post it by adding a new discussion area:

Related Discussions