Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Some classes lost father class #5

Open
xzlyu opened this issue Aug 13, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

Some classes lost father class #5

xzlyu opened this issue Aug 13, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@xzlyu
Copy link

xzlyu commented Aug 13, 2020

Hi,
I download the released Yago 4 from yago-knowledge.org/data/yago4/full/2020-02-24 and parse yago-w-class.nt to check the taxonomy, but I find that http://schema.org/Vessel, http://schema.org/Specialty, http://schema.org/MedicalEnumeration, http://schema.org/MedicalIntangible and http://schema.org/Thing have no father class. Thing is the root so it should not have father class, but, taking Vessel as an example, its father classes AnatomicalStructure, MedicalEntity and Thing are all in yago-wd-class.nt file.
According section 3.1 Concise Taxonomy in yago 4 paper and released data/shapes.ttl file in this repository, Vessel is not the top-level 235 classes choosen, so it must be added to the taxonomy of yago 4 according the second way presented in section 3.1 (if it is added by the first way, its namespace can not be schema.org, which should be yago-knowledge.org/resource), but under the second way, its father class will be added to the taxonomy. I feel confused, can you explain that? Maybe I misunderstand your paper or there are some bugs in the code.
Looking forward to your reply, thanks.

@Tpt
Copy link
Collaborator

Tpt commented Aug 13, 2020

Hi,

Thank you for this bug report!

http://schema.org/Vessel, http://schema.org/Specialty, http://schema.org/MedicalEnumeration and http://schema.org/MedicalIntangible should indeed have parent classes or not be present in YAGO 4. This is an error in the code that builds the type hierarchy (we do some tweaks to the one from schema.org to avoid including things like schema:Property...).
I'm going to write a fix for it.

Thank you again and soorry for the problem.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants