Submissions:Lexico Syntactic ODP corresponding to SubclassOf relation ODP

From Odp

Revision as of 18:43, 23 February 2010 by ElenaMontiel-Ponsoda (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Warning!

This is an old revision. Go to current revision

This pattern has been certified.

Related submission, with evaluation history, can be found here

If you are a member of quality committee please visit the

evaluation section

If you are author of this proposal or you want to contribute to this pattern's review, you can:

In general, it could be useful to visit the evaluation section to have information about the evaluation process of this proposal

Current revision ID: 7405

Description

Name Lexico Syntactic ODPs corresponding to SubclassOf relation ODP
Language English
Also known as LSP-SC-EN
Intent Recurrent expressions in English to state the relation holding between a class and its sublclasses
Solution description The set of Lexico-Syntactic ODPs included here have a direct correspondence to the Logical ODP for modelling "SubclassOf relation", described in the Technical report D5.1.1, NeOn project Deliverable (see Web Reference below).
Description of the correspondence relation between the LSPs and the ODPs one LSP to one ODP
Related ODP(s)
Web reference http://www.neon-project.org/nw/Deliverables
Author(s) Elena Montiel-Ponsoda, Guadalupe Aguado de Cea, Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, Asunción Gómez-Pérez
Submitted by Elena Montiel-Ponsoda


Cases

The Lexico Syntactic ODP corresponding to SubclassOf relation ODP Lexico-Syntactic ODP includes the following cases (see also abbreviations and symbols used in LSP Formalization):


NL Formulation

  • An orphan drug is a type of drug. Odometry, speedometry and GPS are types of sensors.

LSP Formalization

[(NP<subclass>,)* and] NP<subclass> be [CN-CATV] NP<superclass>

Reusable JAPE code: -

name page


Reviews

Reviews about Lexico Syntactic ODP corresponding to SubclassOf relation ODP

There is no review about this proposal. This revision (revision ID 7405) takes in account the reviews: none

Other info at evaluation tab

Personal tools
Quality Committee
Content OP publishers