Re: [Jonto-users] Jeromedl customization: localization of taxonomies, wordnet vocabulary, and indexing properties

[Sebastian K. <seb...@de...>]

Giuseppe,

a quick answer to your questions (although might not be complete):

1) JeromeDL uses JOnto project [http://sf.net/projects/jonto] (yet =20
another from my Corrib cluster) to handle controlled vocabularies. =20
Hence to deliver new taxonomy you just need to have it in a properties =20=

file or RDF file (e.g. SKOS compliant), and you simply need to =20
implement two interfaces in java and package it. The whole process =20
does not take much effort. @Mateusz - could you provide a step by step =20=

description on a wiki?

2) with wordnet it is more tricky - JOnto uses JWNL library to handle =20=

WordNet dictionary. I was always hoping to be able to use other =20
national dictionaries - but we never had time to test it. However, the =20=

infrastructure is there - and what I would suggest to do is to split =20
current wordnet module into an abstract/base dictionary module and =20
implementation modules, e.g., for wordnet. Depending on how much time =20=

Mateusz can contribute to the either we can do that or your team.

3) Answer to this question I leave to Mariusz, Maciej, and MarcOnt =20
team :)

Hope it was useful,

Cheers,

S.


On 13 Dec 2007, at 16:50, Giuseppe Bux wrote:

> Hi Sebastian, Mariusz!
> I would start customization of my local instance of Jeromedl, by =20
> localizing  taxonomies, wordnet vocabulary, and indexing properties. =20=

> Localization will be targeted to an Italian audience. Here in the =20
> following my envisaged  approach and questions about. Please give me =20=

> your kind comments and suggestions.
>
> 1)      Localizing taxonomies: localization should be done by =20
> enriching some selected current taxonomy dictionary (ex. DDC, Dmoz, =20=

> ACM, =85) with synonyms  in local language (i.e. in Italian). This in =20=

> order to manage domain indexing and  related resource searching, by =20=

> using either English  or local (i.e. Italian) terms defined in  each =20=

> selected dictionary. To do that, I would follow steps should be as =20
> follows:
>
> a.       To extract  the RDF description of each dictionary from the =20=

> Sesame-Jonto repository, by a query template as follows:
> Select distinct *
> from {uri} p {value}
> where p=3D <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel> AND uri =20
> like "*http://www.corrib.org/jonto/acm/*"
>
> obviously, for each query,  the =93like=94 value of the =93where=94 =20=

> construct must be adapted to the uri of the given taxonomy.
>
> I have some troubles with the sesame response, i.e.: the query =20
> response in html format gives the expected sesame tabular form, =20
> while the response in rdf format gives me a plain list such as:  =20
> uri  p value uri  p value General Literature uri p value General =85=85.=
.
>
> I need instead a rdf/XML description: How can  obain it? Could you, =20=

> eventually, provide me with the download site of RDF/XML =20
> descriptions of the dictionaries stored in the sesame-Jonto =20
> repository?
>
> b.      To initiate a dictionary customization project  in an RDF =20
> editor, such as Marcont portal or Prot=E8g=E8, by instantiating it =
with =20
> the extracted rdf description of  the given dictionary and with the =20=

> definition of synonyms  of its terms, in local language.
> c.       To update the sesame-jonto repository  with the new rdf =20
> description of the given dictionary.
>
> The =93modify=94 actions of sesame should support the updating =
process.
>
> 2)      Localizing wordnet vocabulary: it should be done simply by =20
> replacing the current wordnet English vocabulary  with a =20
> correspondent  commercial bi-language wordnet vocabulary (in my =20
> case: Ital-Wordnet): does jeromedl implementation gives specific =20
> constraints to do that?
>
> 3)      Localizing indexing properties: this should be done by =20
> predefining additional marcont properties and make them available, =20
> in the  resource uploading form,  for selection  and instantiation =20
> as xmarcont properties.  Really a best approach should be to manage =20=

> the original marcont ontology for its localization as above for the =20=

> dictionaries: what about this  topic in the Marcont project?
>
> Not more to describe.
>
> Looking for your kind comments and suggestions,
>
> Cheers,
> Giuseppe
>
>
>
>
>

--------------------------------------------
--   Sebastian Ryszard Kruk
--   Lead Researcher, Project Manager
--   Semantic Infrastructure Lab, eLearning Cluster
--   Digital Enterprise Research Institute=20
--   National University of Ireland, Galway=20
--   mailto: seb...@de...
--   GG: 335067, Jabber: s_...@ch...
--   Skype: sebastiankruk
--   WWW: http://www.sebastiankruk.com/=20
--   mobile (IRL): +353 85 7126591
--   VoIP   (PL):  +48  52 5110114
--------------------------------------------