W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > January 2013

Re: Issue-68: RE: Thoughts?

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:59:15 +0100
Message-ID: <510A94D3.3040008@w3.org>
To: Mārcis Pinnis <marcis.pinnis@Tilde.lv>
CC: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi Mārcis,

Am 31.01.13 16:52, schrieb Mārcis Pinnis:
> Hi Felix,
>
> I understood that during the call on Wednesday a new idea came up of not having stand-off at all, but merging the two data categories.

Actually, no - the discussion was just about changing "disambiguation". 
No discussion about merge. Summary of the change:
- drop the levels
- rename attributes and the data category to "text analysis annotation".

As said at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/0254.html

 > * Steps needed anyway for resolving issue-67 are: re-writing > the 
now "tan" section (previously "disambig"), and potentially > rewriting / 
merging "Terminology". Opinions on these topics or > volunteers, please 
step up.

No discussion about whether a merge is still needed. See also the other 
mails from Yves, Tadej and I here
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/0254.html

HTH,

Felix

>
> This would allow only one type of annotation at a time. This is fine by me, however, then it has to be understood that process workflows with two types of annotation will in general be impossible. Or ... to be more precise, such workflows would simply not make sense as the types are in general meant for different application (consumption) purposes and if the applications differ, existing mark-up may be in the way when trying to produce additional mark-up with a different type.
>
> But ... this is, I believe, where we actually started the discussion - of just merging the data categories. Also, if you remember, you hinted to the fact that Terminology and Disambiguation has no inheritance - that means that there may be an existing issue (or limitation if you like that word better) in the current version, because, for instance:
> <p its-tan-class-ref="http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Organization">University of <b>London</b></p>
> also after the changes won't be a correct annotation.
>
> So ... if that limitation (although it is a big limitation IMO) is acceptable to everyone, then we may proceed, however ... there may be objections to that?!
>
> Best regards,
> Mārcis ;o)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:35 PM
> To: Mārcis Pinnis
> Subject: Thoughts?
>
> Hi Mārcis,
>
> in case you have any further thoughts on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/0258.html
> just let me or the list know - Christian and Tadej very likely will provide further input by Monday.
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 15:59:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:08:26 UTC