Agenda for DC&P session at Interop

[Brian Thomas]

On Thursday, May 17, 2012 08:59:52 PM Alberto Accomazzi wrote:
> Ok, let me try to be more specific: is there somebody willing to 
> speculate armed with a few slides?  I was thinking of Matthew's 
> experience with the Biologists and SIMBAD object types and how this may 
> translate to thesaurus use.

Well, I use an astronomy dictionary (of my own devising) to determine information 
content (IC) which allows me to merge various astronomy ontologies. This is critical 
for me, because  I need to automate the building of a subject ontology (for resolving 
searches of the registry). Its simply too big a job to do by hand, and without the bridging 
ontologies which I merge in, the subject ontology comes out pretty flat (e.g. not very useful).

So, IMO, I think the direction of the project you are discussing should be towards a 
user-shared 'dictionary' (e.g.has synonyms, antonyms, hypernyms and possibly hyponyms) 
rather than simply a 'thesaurus' which makes me think it will only have synonyms). To 
determine the IC between two terms (e.g. how semantically similar they are) you need
to have both synonyms and hypernyms, at minimum.

Cheers,

-brian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/attachments/20120518/08eb1b74/attachment.html>