W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > November 2009

Re: Subjects & Tagging - Help?

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:37:34 +0000
Message-ID: <4AF0786E.6070403@webr3.org>
To: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
CC: public-lod@w3.org
Alexandre Passant wrote:
> Hi Nathan,
> 
> On 3 Nov 2009, at 18:16, Nathan wrote:
> 
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Hoping for a little bit of guidance here on tagging & assigning 
>> subjects to content etc - I can't quite grasp how to describe what an 
>> item of content is about; particularly in the context of a normal blog 
>> post and with relation to tags/subjects/moat/commontag/scot etc.
>>
>> In short I've build a little mashup of a few services and some linked 
>> data which extracts terms & subjects from an item of content; and now 
>> I'm unclear of which ontologies to use.
>>
>>
>> The info I can extract is "tag string" and mainly a dbpedia uri for 
>> the tag (to give it real meaning I guess)
>>
>> example..
>>     string:    Nuclear program of Iraq
>>     URI:    http://dbpedia.org/resource/Nuclear_program_of_Iran
>>
>> also bearing in mind that I'll typically have 5-10 of these per "post".
>>
>> On the face of it I'd assume I should be using the following for each 
>> "tag" and leaving the string literal value out of the triples altogether
>>     http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject
>>     http://www.holygoat.co.uk/owl/redwood/0.1/tags/taggedWithTag
>>
>> however, with MOAT/CommonTag/SCOT (and no doubt others) added in to 
>> the equation I'm totally lost as which is the most fitting and widely 
>> recognised for tagging content in this manner; is it worth adding 
>> something to say that it was automatically tagged by a machine? or 
>> including the string literal value of the tag(s)?
> 
> SCOT does not directly address the issue of 'tag meaning' but focus on 
> modeling tagclouds and making them interoperable.
> 
> MOAT and CommonTag serve the same general purpose (defining what tag 
> means, in terms of URIs) so you can use whatever you like - however, 
> CommonTag is indexed by SearchMonkey so that is a clearer advantage for 
> it and I'd then suggest to use that one if you develop an app on the Web.
> 
> A few differences between them however so far (it may evolve in the 
> future, with ongoing work on CommonTag)
> 
> - CommonTag provides ways to make the difference between ctag:AuthorTag, 
> ctag:ReaderTag and ctag:AutoTag while MOAT just make the difference 
> between manual and auto-tag.
> - MOAT models the "tagging action" (i.e. tri/quatri-partite model, based 
> on - and extending - the Tag Ontology) and 'global meanings' (that can 
> be used if you want to setup a tag server that deliver URIs / meanings 
> for each tags, e.g. in a company.)
> 
> Hope that helps,
> 

cheers, it does.. but also leaves me thinking I need to be using:
	dc:subject
	tag:taggedWith
	ctag:means
	moat:tagMeaning

surely this is an issue if they're all essentially the same?

and leads me to a further question.. is there any way to express that 
[dc:subject tag:taggedWith ctag:means moat:tagMeaning] are all equal?

thanks again,

nathan
Received on Tuesday, 3 November 2009 18:38:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:24 UTC