W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Associating context with an annotation

From: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 12:49:34 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFPX2kAuba07R0NiCVeL4yudtWYT_UnSS+szKn3CmawyJ11yDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
Cc: James Smith <jgsmith@gmail.com>, public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Sebastian Hellmann <
hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:

> Hi James,


...

>
> As a comparison: the context model in NIF serves mainly these purposes:
> 1. limit the things that you can say about a selection (words are highly
> ambigue, depending on the granularity "house" can have dozens of meanings
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/house#English-abode  ). Thus "house" in a
> certain context is less ambigue and can not have all readings any more.
>
> For 1. If no explicit reference is given, NIF always implicitly assumes
> that the context is the whole document. This is consistent to an annotator,
> who marks a text and adds a DBpedia URI to a specific selection. The
> annotator could annotate the text "Barack" because he knows the document is
> talking about Obama.  The current restriction is that the selection and the
> context have the same format. This allows to encode an "in" or "part of"
> meaning into the "hasContext" property, which is really helpful for
> machines. Thinking about annoting a video in a blogpost. It seems strange
> to me to only annotate part of a video in part of the document.  So when
> having different media, I would assume that we only want to annotate
> "whole" things such as a "whole" video in a "whole" blogpost.  Note that I
> don't mean that you can connect a part of a text to part of an image. I am
> just saying that it might not be a hasContext relation.
>

In OA the first part - selection and the context have the same format - is
covered by the SpecificResource. When you have a fragment of a text or a
video you always have a pointer to the whole document/resource. Did I miss
something there?

I could annotate a fragment of the video with a comment saying 'it is not
consistent with the text of the blogpost'. This annotation is targeting a
video fragment and the context is the document of the blogpost. In science
we have plenty of similar examples for images/figures. I agree though that
the example could be more explicit by elicitating that hasContext more by
creating a more detailed annotation explicitly targeting the fragment of
the video and the fragment of the page. However, the latter requires lots
of work more that not all application/users are willing to perform.

Paolo


> Am 17.08.2012 15:57, schrieb James Smith:
>
>  I've added a page (http://www.w3.org/community/**openannotation/wiki/**
>> Annotating_Resource-in-**Context_Proposals<http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/Annotating_Resource-in-Context_Proposals>)
>> linked off of the Open Issues page. Not sure it's in the right place or has
>> the right title, so feel free to edit. Feel free to add to it.
>>
>> The page briefly outlines the problem, a scenario, and two ways in which
>> we might associate a context with an annotation.
>>
>> -- Jim
>>
>
>
>
>
-- 
Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
http://www.paolociccarese.info/
Biomedical Informatics Research & Development
Instructor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School
Assistant in Neuroscience at Mass General Hospital
+1-857-366-1524 (mobile)   +1-617-768-8744 (office)

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the addressee(s),
may contain information that is considered
to be sensitive or confidential and may not be forwarded or disclosed to
any other party without the permission of the sender.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately.
Received on Friday, 17 August 2012 16:50:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 17 August 2012 16:50:02 GMT