Web Identity

Open GUID

WordNet links

Wednesday, October 8th, 2008 5:29 pm

Open GUID was orginally seeded with WordNet 3.0 noun and verb synsets.  It is now correctly mapped to the WordNet 2.0 synsets via the RDF/OWL Representation of WordNet.

Using the Legacy 2.0 - 3.0 sense maps provided by WordNet, I was able to obtain the corresponding version 2.0 synsetid.  These are directly mapped to the RDF representation in a download available at the W3C.

Several details:

  • 41 synsets in 3.0 combined synsets from 2.0.  These are represented as oguid:identical statements to each 2.0 URI.
  • 138 concepts in 3.0 were split from muddled 2.0 synsets.  These were a problem because two Open GUIDs ended up with relations to the same 2.0 URI.  Because of the transitive nature of oguid:identical, this declared the Open GUIDs to be identical.  For most of these, I unlinked the Open GUID that least matched the 2.0 gloss.  Eight of them were merged back together, because they only differed by being a slang or local term for the same concept.
  • 2896 concepts were brand new.  Since there is not an RDF representation of 3.0, these are maintained with a fictional URL to the W3C, approximately what it would be if they were to publish a new version.
  • 37 links had a low map quality score and are not the same concept.  These were unlinked.

A good example of the result of this mapping is a station wagon.  It is the combination of two WordNet 2.0 synsets, and additionally has a merged relation.  The term ’shooting brake’ is it’s own synset in 3.0, but only differs as a regional word usage.  The 3.0 mapping is maintained for completeness, but not hyperlinked because an RDF representation does not exist.

2 Responses to “WordNet links”

  • Matthias Samwald Says:

    “2896 concepts were brand new. Since there is not an RDF representation of 3.0, these are maintained with a fictional URL to the W3C, approximately what it would be if they were to publish a new version.”

    Uhm, if I understood you right that sounds like a bad idea. Declaring entities in foreign namespaces is really bad practice.

    Matthias Samwald
    DERI Galway, Ireland // Semantic Web Company, Austria

  • Jason Says:

    I agree that is bad practice. As such, the wn3.0 URL is not published in any RDF documents or hyperlinked from the GUID summary screen. It merely exists as an informational reference to help people understand it’s nature.

    Another benefit of maintaining the reference: it can easily become an “active” link if new versions of WordNet RDF/OWL are ever published by the W3C.



Leave a Reply

©2008-2014 OpenGUID.netE-mail: web@

Subscribe to Posts (RSS) and Comments (RSS)