I understand better. I think the key sentence here was: “Important is that Entity Linking requires an actual mention of the Entity in the text while categories do not depend on such mentions. "
-So basically wether the category is based on a SKOS DataSet or Not, this does not matter at all !!! -In both case they link to a dataset, it does not matter if it is SKOS based or not. The difference is how the entity to which we link comes up. Few questions here if you don’t mind. I’m not trying to reemployment things here, but simply to better understand things so i can use the tool properly. 1) How would the information of a specific category set be fetch ? The process of linking in categorisation must be different, in that you do not have the type to guide you. You may well end up with synonyms, without the type erros would occurs. I can see why using a controlled vocabulary would be more easy. There, the disambiguation is within the label directly. Would you confirm my assumption here ? That categorisation with a Skos based dataset (thesarus) is more easy ? 2) Is the reason for the Named Entity Recognition to limit itself to these three specific Type “Pertinence” ? Also would this type be customisable, meaning could you have a bit more types ? 3) What i want to achieve is describing some content resource according to schema.org. For creativeWork, it has the property “schema:about” which must point to a “schema:Thing”. I presume by that, google is expecting here, something else than a controlled Concept. I’m not saying that it is not possible. In the sameWay, with FOAF:Topic that i would also use, I want to point to the real thing rather than a control vocabulary Concept. I would rather use, dc:subject for the SKOS:Concept. Does it make sense? Can the enhancement indeed, categorise according to non-skos instance, that are in an external dataset? Many thanks, Maatari -- Maatari Daniel Okouya Sent with Airmail On 22 Sep 2014 at 06:49:14, Rupert Westenthaler (rupert.westentha...@gmail.com) wrote: Hi Maatari, On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Maatari Daniel Okouya <okouy...@yahoo.fr> wrote: > I’m a bit confused about few concept. Could someone clarify them a bit. > > > When it comes to assigning some topics to a content resource, what would be > the difference between entity linking and categorization ? > First lets explain the terminology as used by Stanbol. For that I will use a todays headline: "Lewis Hamilton not thinking about title after winning Singapore GP" Named Entity Recognition: Detects mentions of Entity types within the text. Typically Persons, Organizations and Locations * Lewis Hamilton -> person * Singapore -> location Entity Linking: Detects mentions of known Entities within the processed Text * Lewis Hamilton -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Hamilton * Singapore Grand Prix -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_Grand_Prix Categorization: Assigns the content to a fixed set of categories. Categories might be hierarchical. A typical example are the IPTC Media Topics [1] which I will use for this example. * sport -> http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/mediatopic/15000000 * Formula One -> http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/mediatopic/20000994 Important is that Entity Linking requires an actual mention of the Entity in the text while categories do not depend on such mentions. > What I see as of now, within some tools well established is the > classification part. Usually it makes use of a control vocabulary to classify > the content. Output = resource dc:Subject controledVocabularyTerm > > However, what i also see in the description of content resource online within > some authority website is to link the document to external non skos resource > via for instance the Foaf:Topic. > > In that second case, do we have both an entity linking and a classification ? > or is it that both are the same, it is just that the knowledge base change, > from external source to controlled vocabulary. Which would mean that in the > world of linked data, content classification / categorization include entity > linking? In that case i would say that, the same was happening when linking > to a controlled vocabulary term. > IMO the properties used to represent analysis results do not necessarily indicate if the results express linked entities or categorizations. Based on the definition both dc:subject and foaf:topic they should be both used for categories. > > I'm little confused here. If someone, could clarify these notion i would > appreciate. hope this helps best Rupert [1] http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/mediatopic -- | Rupert Westenthaler rupert.westentha...@gmail.com | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 | A-5500 Bischofshofen | REDLINK.CO .......................................................................... | http://redlink.co/
