NEEDED: ontology behind Factbook

MJ. Smith
MJ. Smith Member, MVP Posts: 53,060 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited November 21 in English Forum

This is an example from Factbook that is easier than most to make sense of:

However, I really need to see an Ontology for Factbook to make this truly make sense/to be useful.

It appears that you are using "concept" in the same sense as I would naturally use "entity." I can somewhat buy into your use of "Cultural Ontology" by why do these two pairs exist as duples when I see no entry under Simeon for Simon Peter? Note that there are other alternatives in the Peter header that don't have this characteristic e.g. Symeon

Or even more confusing why is the tool of writing present under the text of the writing as in

Under what circumstances would I be concerned with the tools used for writing ... or the original text? for the editing of the text? for the final Masoretic text? What about those of us who suspect the true original is oral?

So, yes, to you the principles behind the Factbook ontology may be obvious ... but trust me, I can find ambiguity and confusion in the simplest of undocumented ontologies.

Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."

Tagged:

Comments

  • Jimmy Parks
    Jimmy Parks Member, Logos Employee Posts: 113

    The Factbook ontology is not yet a fully curated hierarchy. It pulls together many different datasets and databases into one place. We are working on unifying these datasets and databases so that they are more inline with each other and work like a hierarchy is expected to work. However, that is still a work in progress. Since the data itself is not structured in a way to work as a complete hierarchy, there are embeddings used to get data together in the Factbook table of contents. This is a reason why something like writing and implements are connected. This is a known issue and one that we are actively working on. 

  • MJ. Smith
    MJ. Smith Member, MVP Posts: 53,060 ✭✭✭✭✭
    https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1299552#Comment_1299552

    Thank you for the explanation. May I ask a more basic question? Why is Logos so hung up on hierarchy when a graph/web approach is closer to real life? Yes, I'm thinking of the Bible Sense Lexicon which would be much more powerful if not flattened into a hierarchy but rather left as a word web.

    Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."

  • Jimmy Parks
    Jimmy Parks Member, Logos Employee Posts: 113
    https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1299596#Comment_1299596

    I wouldn't frame the issue as Logos being hung up on a style of data organization. The tree based hierarchies are embedded in books and book-like resources. They serve as the organizing principles for almost all of the third party resources that we accommodate. Also, graph databases and web-oriented views of data are relatively new. There is a risk involved with spending time and effort investing in a newer technology, especially if that effort comes at the cost of delivering more/new data. 

    With that said, Content Innovation has been migrating data into a graph database in an effort to unify and better organize all of our data. but that organization will still be delivered through the hierarchical UI in Logos for the time being. The UI demands of migrating all resources into a web view seem far off. 

  • DMB
    DMB Member Posts: 13,413 ✭✭✭
    https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1299596#Comment_1299596

    I'm thinking of the Bible Sense Lexicon which would be much more powerful if not flattened into a hierarchy but rather left as a word web.

    Yes! That was an unfortunate design decision. It closed off how hebrew, greek, etc could be displayed (types of usage, semantics, theology, etc). Arbitrary so not submittable to neurals. And inefficient storage as well.

    "If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.

  • MJ. Smith
    MJ. Smith Member, MVP Posts: 53,060 ✭✭✭✭✭
    https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1299608#Comment_1299608

    Thanks for the explanation, Jimmy.

    Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."

Categories