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

RE: Issue-68: RE: Thoughts?

From: Mārcis Pinnis <marcis.pinnis@Tilde.lv>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:04:23 +0200
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
CC: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AC6FD4BB9BB02540AC7322091A6C3B5472B0F01579@postal.Tilde.lv>
Hi Felix,

Ok, then I misunderstood the minutes.

Then that means that we are at considering just changing Disambiguation?
I think that this solution should be directed to Christian, whether the proposal will resolve his comment or not?!

Best regards,
Mārcis ;o)

-----Original Message-----
From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:59 PM
To: Mārcis Pinnis
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: Re: Issue-68: RE: Thoughts?

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 16:04:53 UTC

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