de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
Deutsch
 
Hilfe Wegweiser Datenschutzhinweis Impressum Kontakt
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Freigegeben

Vortrag

Lexicon standards: From de facto standard Toolbox MDF to ISO standard LMF

MPG-Autoren
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons152

Ringersma,  Jacquelijn
Technical Group, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons94

Kemps-Snijders,  Marc
Technical Group, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

Externe Ressourcen
Es sind keine Externen Ressourcen verfügbar
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)

MDF2LMF.pdf
(beliebiger Volltext), 548KB

Lexicon-standards-LREC10.pdf
(beliebiger Volltext), 57KB

Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Ringersma, J., Drude, S., & Kemps-Snijders, M. (2010). Lexicon standards: From de facto standard Toolbox MDF to ISO standard LMF. Talk presented at LRT standards workshop, Seventh conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation [LREC 2010]. Valetta, Malta. 2010-05-18.


Zitierlink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0012-B96A-3
Zusammenfassung
This paper discusses possible solutions for the apparent incompatibility between two standards for lexicon structure and concept naming: the de facto standard MDF, which is part of the widely used lexicon application Toolbox and the newly accepted ISO standard LMF, ISO FDIS 24613:2008, implemented in the online lexicon tool LEXUS. The basic difference between the two standards is that in MDF, the form-related and meaning-related parts of lexical entries are embedded in each other, while in LMF there is a strict separation of the two parts. The difference might be related to the final medium for which the standards have been created; although Toolbox is a tool for digital lexicon creation, the MDF format was created for printed dictionaries, whereas LMF is created for digital presentation of lexicon resources. At first sight the difference seems to be fundamental and impossible to overcome. However, in this paper we would like show possible solutions, and would like to probe them in the LREC2010 workshop on Language Resource and Language Technology Standards, and thoroughly discuss them amongst a wide linguistic public, before implementing a conversion procedure in the Toolbox import module of the LEXUS tool.