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

Re: PAV (was Re: Review of future/core.html)

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:16:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CABevsUG5LQH-nLW87YxoHZWWe=NR8ag0AoXQrAOCa+MW4_n9rQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: public-openannotation@w3.org
And, to clarify, it would be a side note along with DC Terms as
possible avenues for communities or implementers to explore, not an
explicit recommendation for its use.  We have enough worms already
with things we have to deal with! :)

Rob

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:
> Hi Paolo,
>
> OK, thanks!
> And I'm happy to hear that it's not connected formally to OA yet.
> Without even criticizing the model a single second, I see indeed
> distinctions like "digital resource", "digital artifact", etc. I've fought
> with these for too long in my domain, and I can see cans of worms flashing
> around and long reading and discussions coming...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Antoine
>
>
>> Antoine,
>> PAV is a vocabulary that is used by nanopublications and all my previous
>> work.
>> Probably will be used in Research Objects as well (Stian can confirm or
>> deny that).
>>
>> I've created that ontology for the SWAN project in 2006 and it is used
>> since.
>> With Stian in particular, we created a new version that is build on top of
>> PROV.
>> In fact, PAV is one of the three-four ontologies that has been considered
>> as starting point for the PROV incubator:
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Provenance_Vocabulary_Mappings
>>
>> However, that said, there is no official connection with Open Annotation.
>>
>> I am personally using it for everything I do related to annotation as I
>> need to distinguish creators of the digital resource, and creator of the ip
>> or curators of the ip.
>> And I also need to distinguish a bunch of other things that are essential
>> for tracking science.
>> However, that is, at the moment, out of scope of the specs. Unless
>> something will change in the future.
>>
>> Just to be clear, I obviously also comply with the Open Annotation
>> provenance model (I use both ways at the same time).
>>
>> Best,
>> Paolo
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl
>> <mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>
>>             Re PAV - Me and Paolo are preparing to release PAV 2.1 at
>>              > http://purl.org/pav before end of month (I'll try to
>> squeeze it in
>>              > today!) - it includes PROV bindings and HTML view of the
>> ontology, and
>>              > would easily do the Darwin example.
>>
>>         Let me know when this is available and I'll link it in the
>> specification.
>>
>>
>>
>>     And maybe this will clarify to me what's the role of PAV in the OA
>> model ;-) This thread is the first time I hear about it, I think...
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>
>>     Antoine
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 Monday, 28 January 2013 22:17:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 28 January 2013 22:17:13 GMT