Hi Rupert: I agree with you that: 1. the Entity linking is for Entities the Text 2. the Categorization is at Content or Pages Level
Could you help me with following please: Does Categorization at content or page level mean categorization at URI level? Are "context' along with the triples (N-Quads) allowed in Stanbol Best Regards, Bhoomin Pandya On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Maatari Daniel Okouya <okouy...@yahoo.fr> wrote: > 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/
