Advertisement

Considerations for a Linguistic Network Markup Language

  • Maik StührenbergEmail author
  • Nils Diewald
  • Rüdiger Gleim
Part of the Understanding Complex Systems book series (UCS)

Abstract

As the previous chapters have shown, the possible ways of representing linguistic data as a graph are as diverse as the data itself. For the process of graph modeling, the decision as to what information will be represented as nodes and what information as relations is of great importance. In addition, what kind of added value is going to be expected by the representation of the data as a graph and what kinds of scientific questions should be answerable by the model.

Keywords

Markup Language Adjacency List Hierarchical Graph Lexical Markup Framework Text Encode Initiative 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Bastian et al.(2009)Bastian, Heymann, and Jacomy]
    Bastian, M., Heymann, S., Jacomy, M.: Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating Networks. In: International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (2009)Google Scholar
  2. [Berglund et al.(2010)Berglund, Boag, Chamberlin, Fernández, Kay, Robie, and Siméon]
    Berglund, A., Boag, S., Chamberlin, D., Fernández, M.F., Kay, M., Robie, J., Siméon, J.: XML Path Language (XPath). Version 2.0, 2nd edn. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2010)Google Scholar
  3. [Boag et al.(2010)Boag, Chamberlin, Fernández, Florescu, Robie, and Siméon]
    Boag, S., Chamberlin, D., Fernández, M.F., Florescu, D., Robie, J., Siméon, J.: XQuery 1.0: An XML Query Language, 2nd edn. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2010)Google Scholar
  4. [Bormann and Hoffman(2013)]
    Bormann, C., Hoffman, P.: Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR). Specification. Internet Engineering Task Force (2013)Google Scholar
  5. [Bosak and Bray(1999)]
    Bosak, J., Bray, T.: XML and the Second-Generation Web. Scientific American, 89–93 (1999)Google Scholar
  6. [Brandes et al.(2004)Brandes, Eiglsperger, and Lerner]
    Brandes, U., Eiglsperger, M., Lerner, J.: GraphML Primer (2004), http://graphml.graphdrawing.org/primer/graphml-primer.html
  7. [Brandes et al.(2005)Brandes, Lerner, and Pich]
    Brandes, U., Lerner, J., Pich, C.: GXL to GraphML and Vice Versa with XSLT. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 127(1), 113–125 (2005), doi:10.1016/j.entcs.2004.12.037CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. [Bray et al.(2009)Bray, Hollander, Layman, Tobin, and Thompson]
    Bray, T., Hollander, D., Layman, A., Tobin, R., Thompson, H.S.: Namespaces in XML 1.0, 3rd edn. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2009)Google Scholar
  9. [Bray et al.(2008)Bray, Paoli, Sperberg-McQueen, Maler, and Yergeau]
    Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Maler, E., Yergeau, F.: Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0, 5th edn. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2008)Google Scholar
  10. [Burnard and Bauman(2014)]
    Burnard, L., Bauman, S. (eds.): TEI P5: Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange. Text Encoding Initiative Consortium, Charlottesville (2014), Version 2.7.0. Last updated on 16th September 2014, revision 13036Google Scholar
  11. [Clark(1999)]
    Clark, J.: XSL Transformations (XSLT) Version 1.0. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (1999)Google Scholar
  12. [Clark and DeRose(1999)]
    Clark, J., DeRose, S.J.: XML Path Language (XPath). Version 1.0. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (1999)Google Scholar
  13. [Crockford(2006)]
    Crockford, D.: The application/json Media Type for JavaScript Object Notation (JSON). Specification. Internet Engineering Task Force (2006)Google Scholar
  14. [DeRose et al.(2001)DeRose, Maler, and Orchard]
    DeRose, S.J., Maler, E., Orchard, D.: XML Linking Language (XLink) Version 1.0. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2001)Google Scholar
  15. [DeRose et al.(2010)DeRose, Maler, Orchard, and Walsh]
    DeRose, S.J., Maler, E., Orchard, D., Walsh, N.: XML Linking Language (XLink) Version 1.1. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2010)Google Scholar
  16. [Ebert et al.(1999)Ebert, Kullbach, and Winter]
    Ebert, J., Kullbach, B., Winter, A.: GraX – An Interchange Format for Reengineering Tools. In: Sixth Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, pp. 89–98. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [Gao et al.(2012)Gao, Sperberg-McQueen, and Thompson]
    Gao, S.(S.)., Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Thompson, H.S.: W3C XML Schema Definition Language (XSD) 1.1 Part 1: Structures. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2012)Google Scholar
  18. [Herman and Marshall(2001)]
    Herman, I., Marshall, M.S.: GraphXML – An XML-Based Graph Description Format. In: Marks, J. (ed.) GD 2000. LNCS, vol. 1984, pp. 52–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [Himsolt(1997)]
    Himsolt, M.: GML: A portable Graph File Format. Tech. rep. Universitaät Passau (1997)Google Scholar
  20. [Holt(1997)]
    Holt, R.: An Introduction to TA: The Tuple Attribute Language (1997), http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~holt/papers/ta-intro.html (updated 2002)
  21. [Ide(1998)]
    Ide, N.M.: Corpus Encoding Standard: SGML Guidelines for Encoding Linguistic Corpora. In: Proceedings of the First International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 1998), pp. 463–470. European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Granada (1998)Google Scholar
  22. [Ide et al.(2000)Ide, Bonhomme, and Romary]
    Ide, N.M., Bonhomme, P., Romary, L.: XCES: An XML-based Encoding Standard for Linguistic Corpora. In: Proceedings of the Second International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2000), pp. 825–830. European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Athen (2000)Google Scholar
  23. [Ide et al.(1996)Ide, Priest-Dorman, and Véronis]
    Ide, N.M., Priest-Dorman, G., Véronis, J.: Corpus Encoding Standard (CES). Tech. rep. Expert Advisory Group on Language Engineering Standards, EAGLES (1996)Google Scholar
  24. [ISO 12620:2009]
    ISO 12620:2009. Terminology and other language and content resources — Specification of data categories and management of a Data Category Registry for language resources. International Standard. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  25. [ISO 24610-1:2006]
    ISO 24610-1:2006. Language Resource Management — Feature Structures – Part 1: Feature Structure Representation. International Standard. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  26. [ISO 24612:2012]
    ISO 24612:2012. Language Resource Management — Linguistic annotation framework (LAF). International Standard. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  27. [ISO 24613:2008]
    ISO 24613:2008. Language Resource Management — Lexical markup framework (LMF). International Standard. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  28. [ISO/IEC 19757-2:2003]
    ISO/IEC 19757-2:2003. Information technology — Document Schema Definition Language (DSDL) – Part 2: Regular-grammar-based validation – RELAX NG (ISO/IEC 19757-2). International Standard. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva Google Scholar
  29. [Kay(2007)]
    Kay, M.: XSL Transformations (XSLT) Version 2.0. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2007)Google Scholar
  30. [Mehler(2008)]
    Mehler, A.: Structural Similarities of Complex Networks: A Computational Model by Example of Wiki Graphs. Applied Artificial Intelligence 22(7&8), 619–683 (2008), doi:10.1080/08839510802164085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [Murata et al.(2005)Murata, Lee, Mani, and Kawaguchi]
    Murata, M., Lee, D., Mani, M., Kawaguchi, K.: Taxonomy of XML Schema Languages Using Formal Language Theory. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 5(4), 660–704 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [NWB Team(2006)]
    NWB Team. Network Workbench Tool. Tech. rep. Northeastern University and University of Michigan (2006)Google Scholar
  33. [Peterson et al.(2012)Peterson, Gao, Malhotra, Sperberg-McQueen, and Thompson]
    Peterson, D., Gao, S.(S.)., Malhotra, A., Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Thompson, H.S.: W3C XML Schema Definition Language (XSD) 1.1 Part 2: Datatypes. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2012)Google Scholar
  34. [Punin and Krishnamoorthy(2001)]
    Punin, J., Krishnamoorthy, M.: XGMML (eXtensible Graph Markup and Modeling Language). XGMML 1.0 Draft Specification. Dept. of Computer Science RPI, NY (2001)Google Scholar
  35. [Robie et al.(2013)Robie, Chamberlin, Dyck, and Snelson]
    Robie, J., Chamberlin, D., Dyck, M., Snelson, J.: XQuery 3.0: An XML Query Language. W3C Candidate Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2013)Google Scholar
  36. [Saito et al.(2012)Saito, Smoot, Ono, Ruscheinski, Wang, Lotia, Pico, Bader, and Ideker]
    Saito, R., Smoot, M.E., Ono, K., Ruscheinski, J., Wang, P.-L., Lotia, S., Pico, A.R., Bader, G.D., Ideker, T.: A travel guide to Cytoscape plugins. Nature Methods 9, 1069–1076 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. [Schürr et al.(1999)Schürr, Winter, and Zündorf]
    Schürr, A., Winter, A.J., Zündorf, A.: PROGRES: Language and Environment. In: Kreowski, H.-J., Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) Handbook on Graph Grammars: Applications, Languages and Tools, vol. 2, pp. 487–550. World Scientific, Singapore (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [Smoot et al.(2011)Smoot, Ono, Ruscheinski, Wang, and Ideker]
    Smoot, M., Ono, K., Ruscheinski, J., Wang, P.-L., Ideker, T.: Cytoscape 2.8: new features for data integration and network visualization. Bioinformatics 27(3), 431–432 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. [Sperberg-McQueen and Burnard(1994)]
    Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Burnard, L. (eds.): TEI P3: Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange. Published for the TEI Consortium by Humanities Computing Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford (1994)Google Scholar
  40. [Stührenberg(2013)]
    Stührenberg, M.: What, when, where? Spatial and temporal annotations with XStandoff. In: Proceedings of Balisage: The Markup Conference, Montréal. Balisage Series on Markup Technologies, vol. 10 (2013), doi:10.4242/BalisageVol10.Stuhrenberg01Google Scholar
  41. [Stührenberg and Jettka(2009)]
    Stührenberg, M., Jettka, D.: A toolkit for multi-dimensional markup: The development of SGF to XStandoff. In: Proceedings of Balis-age: The Markup Conference, Montréal. Balisage Series on Markup Technologies, vol. 3 (2009), doi:10.4242/BalisageVol3.Stuhrenberg01Google Scholar
  42. [Stührenberg and Wurm(2010)]
    Stührenberg, M., Wurm, C.: Refining the Taxonomy of XML Schema Languages. A new Approach for Categorizing XML Schema Languages in Terms of Processing Complexity. In: Proceedings of Balisage: The Markup Conference. Vol. 5. Balisage Series on Markup Technologies, Montréal (2010), doi:10.4242/BalisageVol5.Stuhrenberg01Google Scholar
  43. [Thompson et al.(2004)Thompson, Beech, Maloney, and Mendelsohn]
    Thompson, H.S., Beech, D., Maloney, M., Mendelsohn, N.: XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2004)Google Scholar
  44. [W3C Web Ontology Working Group(2012)]
    W3C Web Ontology Working Group, OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. Document Overview, 2nd edn. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, W3C (2012)Google Scholar
  45. [Walmsley(2012)]
    Walmsley, P.: Definitive XML Schema, 2nd edn. The Charles F. Gold-farb Definitive XML Series. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2012)Google Scholar
  46. [Winter et al.(2002)Winter, Kullbach, and Riedinger]
    Winter, A.J., Kullbach, B., Riediger, V.: An Overview of the GXL Graph Exchange Language. In: Diehl, S. (ed.) Dagstuhl Seminar 2001. LNCS, vol. 2269, pp. 324–336. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maik Stührenberg
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nils Diewald
    • 1
  • Rüdiger Gleim
    • 2
  1. 1.IDS MannheimMannheimGermany
  2. 2.Goethe-University FrankfurtFrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations