Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSperberg-McQueen, Michael
dc.contributor.authorHuitfeldt, Claus
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-30T12:00:21Z
dc.date.available2024-08-30T12:00:21Z
dc.date.created2024-01-31T19:25:26Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.issn1938-4122
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3149352
dc.description.abstractOntologies, it is sometimes said, take the form of a hierarchy or tree: each class is subdivided into distinct subclasses with no cross classifications. But if the purpose of an ontology is to make possible useful inferences and to guide software users and developers, it is better to allow a more flexible structure. Using text annotation as an example (with concrete reference to the CATMA annotation tool), we argue that it will be more useful to structure ontologies as lattices, not trees.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleAre Ontologies Trees or Lattices?en_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.cristin2240963
dc.source.journalDigital Humanities Quarterlyen_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Humaniora: 000en_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Humanities: 000en_US
dc.identifier.citationDigital Humanities Quarterly, 2023, 17 (3).en_US
dc.source.volume17en_US
dc.source.issue3en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal