1. Trends in Concept Modelling Turning Issues into Solutions How to Discipline a Cat Sue Ellen Wright, Kent State University

2. Herding ISOcats Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 2 http://blog.karmona.com/wp- content/uploads/2008/10/herding-cats.jpg

3. What is ISOcat? – 1 The implementation of the ISO TC 37 Data Category Registry, a Metadata Registry A knowledge resource containing, i.a., definitions for data category concepts used to annotate language resources A (potentially) authoritative concept database that can be used to anchor relations in external Relation Registries (RRs) and other knowledge resources Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 3

4. Semantic Issues for DCs What data element names occur in these data? What do the content of these DCs “mean” in a semantic sense? Can I utilize these data in my environment, especially across barriers of communities of practice? Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 4

5. Goals of ISOcat Supporting the reusability, integratability, and interoperability of data by defining data categories (data element concepts) as an instantiation of ISO 11179 Trusting data in a climate of different communities of practice Community collaboration in defining the data categories used in language resources Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 5

6. Metadata Registries in 11179 An ISO metadata registry consists of a hierarchy of "concepts" with associated properties for each concept. Concepts are similar to classes in object-oriented programming but without the behavioral elements. Properties are similar to Class attributes. ISO standards require that each concept and property have a precisely worded data element definition hierarchyclassesobject-oriented programmingdata element definition Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 6

7. What is ISOcat? – 2 A social network designed to facilitate the creation of data category specifications for use in linguistic annotation schemes A forum for achieving consensus on data category names, definitions, permissible instances and data category selections for work groups and thematic domains A framework for standardizing a subset of these data categories and data category selections (e.g., tagsets) Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 7

8. ISOcat as an MDR with a history “Authority” and credibility are hampered by: –Incorrect spellings, definitions, examples –Narrow perspectives that ignore individual language specifics –Failure to observe moderately uniform conventions –Failure in the past to accommodate consensus among experts Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 8

9. Knowledge Resource Issues Flawed legacy data from the Syntax pilot DCR –Lack of stable guidelines for attributes such as definitions & some names –Introduction of data refinements, which require updating virtually all DCs –Technical glitches that resulted in missing DCs –Inevitable errors, coupled with inability to edit entries –Lack of efficient group consensus mechanism Danger of similar issues in the future Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 9

10. Examples: Flawed SALT Input Critical standardized items not imported Recreated, but not marked as standard Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 10 /part of speech/ is standardized as per ISO 12620:1999, but shows up as private & candidate

11. Uncorrected Data Errors Incorrect definition for some languages Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 11 In languages that actually use the accusative case, it is frequently used for other purposes, particularly as an object of some prepositions, or to use a noun as an adverbial. (Alas, even Crystal can be wrong on occasion.)

12. Uncorrected Data Errors Discursive, rambling definitions; inappropriate example ___ ___ ___Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 12 Again, reliance on one source & lack of feedback from speakers of other languages results in misinformation. A better example: She fixed him a nice lunch.

13. Language-Related Issues English, which can talk about the accusative case, but does not actually have an accusative case, conflates dative and accusative (at least) into objective case, but there is no entry for this. Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 13

14. Conflicting Definitions The object is to define appellative nouns used as components of proper nouns Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 14

15. Uncorrected Data Errors Tautological definition, confusing note, lack of a clarifying example 15 Definitions should not simply restate the elements of the data category name.

16. Uncorrected Data Errors Incorrect “language-independent” name (incorrect English name) Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 16 The correct name is participial adjective..

17. Solutions Data must be reliable and adhere to consistent rules in order to contribute to trust on the Web. DCR Guidelines (unavailable during Syntax phase) are now in place. http://www.isocat.org/manual/DCRGuidelines.pdf http://www.isocat.org/manual/DCRGuidelines.pdf Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 17

18. Solutions Provide appropriate social networking environment & technical features Designed to avoid and correct similar discrepancies in the future Rationale: –Individual experts can make mistakes. –Group consensus verifies form and content. –Multiple mother tongues contribute to broader understanding. –Even non-standardized DCs benefit from consensus. Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01.18

19. Roles in ISOcat – Individuals Guests –Access, select, and output data Experts –Above, plus save DCs, DCSs –Create new DCs –Share DCs –Create & serve on Ad Hoc Groups, TDGs –Coordinate Ad Hoc Group, chair TDGs –Submit DCs for standardization Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 19

20. Roles in ISOcat Ad hoc groups – informal groups of experts assigned by individual experts –Comment on and reach consensus on DCs in shared space –Submit (if desired) DCs for standardization Semi-formal ad hoc groups: –LISA/OSCAR group, others (DITA? DARWIN? XLIFF?) –CLARIN work groups –ISOcat work groups for other major projects Informal, truly ad hoc groups Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 20

21. Roles in ISOcat Thematic Domain Groups –Formal groups appointed by ISO TC 37 P members & TDG Chairs TDG Chairs –Manage DC evaluation process per ISO 12620 DCR Board members –Conduct DC validation & harmonization process Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 21

22. QA Scenario 1, Phase 1 Expert A spots perceived error in DC belonging to Expert B or to a TDG Expert A clones currently locked DC in his/her own workspace Here s/he can propose editorial corrections in the cloned DC Expert A invites Expert B to share clone Expert A informs TDG and shares clone Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 22

23. QA Scenario 2, Phase 1 TDG chair/Ad Hoc Group leader creates a DCS for review –Selection from current DCs or –Creation of new DCs –Profile change management DCS (with its DCs) assigned to a pre- defined group (ad hoc or TDG) Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 23

24. Profiles versus DCSs Profile membership is part of the DC specification –the profile indicates the thematic domain of the DC –the profile view in the UI is created by a query –there are a limited number of profiles A DCS is a collection of DCs –hand picked by an user for a specific purpose –can contain DCs from various profiles –there can be an unlimited number of DCSs There isn’t (yet) a profile specific view on a DCS 24 Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01

25. QA Scenario 3, Phase 1 Any role (individual expert, group, DCRB member) identifies the need to harmonize DCs between TDGs or across communities of practice within a TDG DC or DCs collected, cloned Discussion group assigned & notified Multiple ad hoc or thematic domain groups may have to interact. Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 25

26. All QA Scenarios, Phase 2 Wiki and/or forum based discussion Informal consensus or formal balloting Correction according to above decision Harmonization issues –Option 1: DCs merged to form one, perhaps with multiple profile options –Option 2: Multiple DCs, with clear indication of differences that justify doublettes –Option 3: Build external RR linking doublettes Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 26

27. Justified Doublettes – Terminology The value domain for /part of speech/ in Terminology is very short. Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 27

28. Doublettes – Morphosyntax PoS The value domain for morphosyntax is extremely large.

29. Tasks Enable the retention of historical data category specifications while facilitating ongoing revisions Integration of a variety of social networking features –Wiki and forum add-ons –Internal messaging system –Link to external mail Creation, consensus, revision, harmonization Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01 29

30. Thanks for your attention! Come play with the cat! http://www.isocat.org/ sellenwright@gmail.com isocat@mpi.nl 30Neeri Conference, Helsinki, 2009-10-01