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

Re: Streamlining the OA Model oax:range vs, endIndex

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 23:09:13 +0200
Message-ID: <505F7A79.3020701@few.vu.nl>
To: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
CC: <public-openannotation@w3.org>
Yes, Paolo.
By deprecation I understood simply "remove it".

Antoine


> I am good either way. However I wonder if, as we are at the draft stave and we haven't published a first final spec yet, deprecation still makes sense.
>
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl <mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl>> wrote:
>
>     +1 to what Bob said.
>     No offense, but it's not as if the current model was a second version of some official standard. So it seems fair to deprecate a pattern that would be clearly sub-optimal. And probably at this stage the implementors who may have implemented the pattern to be removed can be contacted, to check with them if it's alright!
>
>     Antoine
>
>
>         With this or \any/ change, there is always the problem of backward
>         compatibility. If the proposed change (which I favor) is adopted, I
>         think the previous should be deprecated and people urged to even
>         consider publishing existing annotations in the new form also, perhaps
>         with an oa:equivalentAnnotation if necessary.
>
>         Two semantically equivalent ways publishing always run a risk of some
>         kind of issue or other. If both are in the core--so that both are
>         expected to be treated by compliant consumers, then in the current
>         case it seems like the main problem is that producers are imposing
>         more processing on consumers and this is probably a small burden for
>         small annotation collections. But it might be serious for data miners
>         harvesting knowledge from large collections of annotations.
>
>         Bob
>
>
>
>
>         On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Paolo Ciccarese
>         <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com <mailto:paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>             Hi Sebastian,
>             that observation has been made many times by people in the text mining
>             community.
>             It really seems expensive to calculate the 'end' through the range given the
>             high number of annotations that can be machine generated.
>
>             I think I am in favor of that change at this point.
>
>             Maybe we can introduce a new selector with begin/end so that who has already
>             implemented begin and offset will be still ok?
>
>             Best,
>             Paolo
>
>
>             On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Sebastian Hellmann
>             <hellmann@informatik.uni-__leipzig.de <mailto:hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>> wrote:
>
>
>                 Hi all,
>                 the meeting was really interesting and I learned a lot. For NIF 2.0, I
>                 will draft such a document specifying a mapping, between the two models. I
>                 think the most difficult part here are the mappings between the selectors.
>
>                 Here is an initial question:
>                 In http://www.openannotation.org/__spec/extension/#SelectorOffset <http://www.openannotation.org/spec/extension/#SelectorOffset> was there
>                 any strong reason to use oax:range instead of something like end index.
>                 When querying with SPARQL, you can:
>
>                 with range: order all selections by length, get all selection of a
>                 specific length, query if any annotation begin at a certain position
>
>                 with begin, end index: query if any annotation are within a certain
>                 region, query for overlaps and locality of annotations, i.e. is there an
>                 annotation in this paragraph?
>
>
>                 Addition/subtraction is quite an expensive aggregate. So what do you think
>                 is the more common use case. I would vote for begin and end index and
>                 querying overlaps and inclusion. Maybe, we can do it similar to Apache
>                 Stanbol, which also uses endIndex.
>
>                 Any opinions on this? Should I copy/paste and open an issue in the Wiki?
>                 Or could there be consensus right the first time?
>
>                 Sebastian
>
>
>
>
>
>                 Am 15.09.2012 00:54, schrieb Randall Leeds:
>
>
>                     On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Robert Sanderson<azaroth42@gmail.com <mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com>>
>                     wrote:
>
>
>                         I would like to propose a joint work item to create a mapping document
>                         between NIF and OA, if you think that would be useful?
>
>
>                     I think it would be invaluable to people discovering OA and NIF to
>                     have such a document.
>                     +1
>
>
>
>                 --
>                 Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
>                 Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
>                 Events:
>                 * http://sabre2012.infai.org/__mlode <http://sabre2012.infai.org/mlode> (Leipzig, Sept. 23-24-25, 2012)
>                 * http://wole2012.eurecom.fr (*Deadline: July 31st 2012*)
>                 Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://dbpedia.org
>                 Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-__leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann <http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann>
>                 Research Group: http://aksw.org
>
>
>
>
>             --
>             Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
>             http://www.paolociccarese.__info/ <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 <tel:%2B1-857-366-1524> (mobile) +1-617-768-8744 <tel:%2B1-617-768-8744> (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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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 Sunday, 23 September 2012 21:09:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 23 September 2012 21:09:50 GMT