1

Consider:

OMINI data extraction method builds on the hypothesis (assumes) that there is a unique data region, which is the largest region in the web document, that this region contains multiple data records, that some tags are more likely to be data record separators based on their type and their occurrences, and that counting on an ontology helps identify data records.

It includes several assumptions that all refer back to "It assumes that ...". I want to break these sentences to separated sentences. Something like:

It assumes that there is a unique data region, which is the largest region in the web document, that contains multiple data records separated by certain tags. It also assumes that counting on an ontology helps identify data records.

First, I am not sure about using the second that. Moreover, it is still long. If I want to shorten it further I may lose the connections between them or be forced to repeat "It assumes". I need some guide to overcome this issues.

  • What do you mean by unique? And remember, best not to start your text here with something that needs prior context to be understood, (e.g. "It"). – Tᴚoɯɐuo Dec 15 '16 at 20:06
  • And what do you meaning by "counting on an ontology"? – Tᴚoɯɐuo Dec 15 '16 at 20:08
  • @TRomano, see Ontology. It seems an overly formal way to say that each record has unique indices -- but might be perfectly normal in academia. – Andrew Dec 15 '16 at 23:48
  • @Andrew: my question is about the entire phrase. How can "counting on" something "help to identify"? – Tᴚoɯɐuo Dec 16 '16 at 11:07
  • @TRomano Actually its not my sentences, I try to paraphrase it. its maybe "relying on"... – Ahmad Dec 16 '16 at 13:14
5

You're looking at a virtual list. You're not going to be able to break it down into separate sentences without rewriting, but you can turn it into a formal list, e.g.:

It builds on the hypothesis (assumes) that:

  • there is a unique data region, which is the largest region in the web document,
  • this region contains multiple data records,
  • some tags are more likely to be data record separators based on their type and their occurrences, and
  • counting on an ontology helps identify data records.

To present it as a paragraph instead of a bulleted list, Ahmad, you'll either have to accept the original form, which is very long, or re-write. Just adding punctuation won't help enough.

If I needed to re-write, the result might be something like this:

It assumes that there is a unique data region, and that that region is the largest region in the web document. Such a region contains data records that are delimited by certain tags that act as separators. These separators can be identified ontologically because of their nature and their frequency.

That separates the original into 3 concepts: there is a single data region; it has records that have separators; the separators, and thus the records, can be identified by looking for a certain kind of repetitiveness.

On the other hand, since I don't have any context, I'm just guessing at the meaning, and might have turned what you wrote into nonsense. If I did, I apologise and hope you can at least get a sense of direction from it.

  • Good! but how can I write them in a paragraph without using bullets (I mean the punctuation that is required) – Ahmad Dec 16 '16 at 5:32
  • 3
    @Ahmad: Items in a (non-bulleted) list are conventionally separated by semi-colons. – Tᴚoɯɐuo Dec 16 '16 at 11:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.