You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As suggested in the OntoLex-Morph discussions, morpheme types should be implemented with reference to instances of lexinfo:TermEntry. In order for this to work, we need lexinfo:rootMorph, lexinfo:stemMorph, lexinfo:transfixMorph, lexinfo:simulfixMorph, lexinfo:zeroMorph, lexinfo:circumfix (possibly more).
Definitions to be provided.
Note: Once these are being provided, we can abandon the subclasses of morph:Morph.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Update: We found that LexInfo also provides a similar taxonomy of morphemes as subclasses of ontolex:Affix. As these are closer to the original definition on OntoLex-Morph and do not come with the association with "Term", extending this set of subclasses of ontolex:Affix and morph:Morph would be our preferred modelling choice,
As suggested in the OntoLex-Morph discussions, morpheme types should be implemented with reference to instances of lexinfo:TermEntry. In order for this to work, we need lexinfo:rootMorph, lexinfo:stemMorph, lexinfo:transfixMorph, lexinfo:simulfixMorph, lexinfo:zeroMorph, lexinfo:circumfix (possibly more).
Definitions to be provided.
Note: Once these are being provided, we can abandon the subclasses of morph:Morph.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: