Re: Workflows for localizing RDF (Fwd: Fwd: "Organization Ontology" Japanese translation available)

>
> About "But do we get issues when using this data type  (or any non
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString datatype) when also
> using language tags on the literal? :": Dave is right, the HTML data type
> would not allow for using the language tag. You only could use it in the
> HTML content, that is no query with SPARQL.
>
> Your feedback was quite useful - my main point is: do we want to write all
> this down in easy to understand best practices? Dave had asked a similar
> question, I think.
>

In my opinion, yes. It is a very interesting topic that has appeared in a
real scenario. Looking at the Topics that we had proposed here:

https://www.w3.org/community/bpmlod/wiki/Topic_classification

I think this discussion could fit in:

2.3 - Longer descriptions, where we could talk about the use of HTML and
even XML literals.
2.4 - Lexicalizations and linguistic information
2.5 - Localization information

4.2 - Localization of existing vocabularies

Do you think we need to add a different topic or is it ok as is?

Best regards, Jose Labra


-

>
> Felix
>
> Am 10.02.14 01:21, schrieb dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie:
>
> Hi Felix,
> Couple of comment inline:
>
> On 07/02/2014 11:39, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
> that makes sense - but do we need to have a special literal type to
> indicate that it should be parsed for 'inline' tags?
>
>
> See above - the HTML literal
> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-html
> should do the job.
>
>
> But do we get issues when using this data type  (or any non
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString datatype) when also
> using language tags on the literal? :
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#dfn-literal-value
>
>
>  Also in some cases, for example if the span had its-term--into-ref
> pointing to a term definitions elsewhere in the linked data cloud, best
> practice might be to reform (i.e. extract) the literal into a NIF subgraph,
> with the annotated sub-string as separate nif:string objects.
>
>
> Not sure if for generating an XLIFF file (see above) you would a NIF
> subgraph. The main motivation for my BP proposal was: allow people working
> with localization tools (= processing XLIFF files) to translate labels in
> linke data.
>
> So all the below makes sense IMO for textual content, extracted from HTML
> / XML etc. But processing the labels in linked data with NIF? Not sure if
> that is needed and might even hinder XLIFF based using localization
> workflows.
>
>
> Agreed, getting the annotation to work with XLIFF/ITS in a way that can
> used used in exisitng tools should be the primary aim here.
>
> The use of NIF is more relevant if you wanted to make the content
> available to NLP tools that could understand NIF - which is a different use
> case.
>
> cheers,
> Dave
>
>
>  Disclaimer: really nothing against NIF ;) My point is only about the
> right approach for label translation.
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
>
>
>
>


-- 
Saludos, Labra