W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > November 2004

RE: [VM] Need a section about (Formal and Natural) Languages in V ocabularies?

From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:09:22 -0000
Message-ID: <350DC7048372D31197F200902773DF4C05E50CF8@exchange11.rl.ac.uk>
To: "'public-swbp-wg@w3.org'" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

Bernard's approach mirrors something we wrote up in the SWAD-E project on
dealing with multilingual thesauri - see:

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/thes/8.3/

... for general idea of 'multilingual labelling' vs. 'inter-lingual mapping'
approaches, although don't look too closely at code examples as they use
deprecated SKOS constructs and far too many blank nodes (they were written a
while ago).

Al.

---
Alistair Miles
Research Associate
CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Building R1 Room 1.60
Fermi Avenue
Chilton
Didcot
Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
United Kingdom
Email:        a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440



> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Bernard Vatant
> Sent: 29 October 2004 11:51
> To: SW Best Practices
> Subject: [VM] Need a section about (Formal and Natural) Languages in
> Vocabularies?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Re-reading the draft over my morning coffee ...
> 
> I think we miss an important section in the document about 
> the Language(s) in which a
> Vocabulary is published.
> When I say Language, it's both so-called "Natural Languages" 
> (like e.g.
> http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/639/#fra) and "Formal 
> Languages" (XML, RDF, OWL ...). I
> would gladly see those added to the consensual glossary, 
> something like.
> 
> Formal Language : A formal standard syntax in which the 
> Vocabulary is issued
> Natural Language : A language in which the terms are 
> originally expressed (wording to
> improve here)
> 
> I think we address much the former in Semantic Web specs and 
> literature, but that the
> latter is too often ignored, or quickly swept by something 
> like "If you really need other
> languages - read : other than universal English ;-) - use a 
> "label", but it will bear no
> semantics ...".
> 
> If we want SW to be adopted, say, in European Community, we 
> need to say something about
> multilingualism practices.
> 
> BTW it has been answered to my previous post (Tom, Jim) that 
> the name vs concept was not a
> pragmatic issue (read: it is an old unbreakable academic 
> debate we should not confuse
> people with). Well, seems to me that, considered from the 
> multilingual viewpoint, it is a
> pragmatic issue, like the following points try to show.
> 
> When publishing a multi-lingual vocabulary, which is the best 
> practice for identifiers
> among the following options?
> 
> 1. Have a single URI to identify the concept, and attach the 
> names in different languages
> as labels.
> This option considers that labels in different languages 
> represent in fact one single
> term-concept.
> 
> Option 1.a : Use the "default" or "base" language to build 
> human-readable URIs, like:
> 
> 	Vocabulary Default Language : 	French
> 	Other Language				English
> 	Term : 					
> http://MyAuthorityDomain/MyDirectory/MyNameSpace#Societe
> 	English Label: 				Company
> 
> This option implicitly assumes that I had a Vocabulary built 
> and thought in French, then
> translated in English.
> 
> Option 1.b : Use language-neutral, hence non-human readable 
> URIs, and a label in each
> language
> 
> 	Vocabulary Languages : 	French, English
> 	Term : 			
> http://MyAuthorityDomain/MyDirectory/MyNameSpace#Concept2546
> 	English Label:		Company
> 	French Label: 		Societe
> 
> This option implicitly assumes that similar terms in English 
> and French has been agreed as
> representing a somehow language-independent concept. Such 
> vocabularies are indeed often
> built from various monolingual sources. A good example is 
> GEMET (GEneral Multilingual
> Environmental Thesaurus of European Environment Agency - 19 
> languages and growing).
> 
> 2. Use one identifier by language, and if necessary link them 
> by any relevant, formal or
> informal relation. This option considers that a term can't be 
> considered independently of
> the NL in which it was first expressed. It can be chosen for 
> domains where vocabularies
> are likely to carry a strong specific linguistic-cultural 
> bias. Say e.g. legal concepts in
> Belgium, in both French and Dutch (there again, this is a use 
> case I've been working on
> lately).
> 
> 	Vocabulary Languages : 	French, English
> 	French Term:			
> http://MyAuthorityDomain/MyDirectory/MyNameSpace#Societe
> 	English Term:			
> http://MyAuthorityDomain/MyDirectory/MyNameSpace#Company
> 
> In this latter option, the concept schemes (using here SKOS 
> wording) are developed
> independently, but clearly need matching. There again SKOS 
> has opened the way towards
> expression of such matching (exact, loose, formal ...)
> 
> Bernard
> 
> **************************************************************
> ********************
> 
> Bernard Vatant
> Senior Consultant
> Knowledge Engineering
> bernard.vatant@mondeca.com
> 
> "Making Sense of Content" :  http://www.mondeca.com
> "Everything is a Subject" :  http://universimmedia.blogspot.com
> 
> **************************************************************
> ********************
> 
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]De la part de Thomas Baker
> > Envoye : mercredi 27 octobre 2004 15:56
> > A : SW Best Practices
> > Objet : [VM] Roles for VM Task Force members
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > As explained in my earlier posting, the latest draft includes
> > alot of TASKS for specific members of the Task Force based on
> > my "best guess" as to what text contributions are needed in
> > specific sections.  These TASKS reflect the following rough
> > division of labor:
> >
> >     Tom       - coordinator and editor; Dublin Core
> >     Libby     - FOAF, W3C specs and findings
> >     Dan       - FOAF, W3C specs and findings
> >     Alistair  - SKOS, thesauri, TAG on versioning
> >     Bernard   - OASIS Public Subjects
> >     Ralph     - W3C specs and findings
> >     James     - Use of vocabularies in Semantic Web
> >     Aldo      - Princeton Wordnet
> >     Alan      - Maybe an example ontology?
> >     Natasha   - Maybe an example ontology?
> >
> > I list below how these specializations translate into
> > specific tasks.  I would appreciate if you could provide
> > me with feedback on these tasks over the coming week --
> > if only to confirm that the default tasks seem reasonable.
> >
> > Of course, my intention with proposing specific tasks is
> > to help us focus -- not to set limits on participation!
> > If you would like to adjust the scope of your involvement,
> > please let me know so I can adjust your TASKS before the
> > draft goes up on the Wiki.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Tom
> >
> > -----
> >
> > Alan
> > - An example of a large-scale ontology?
> > - "What constitutes a change?"
> >
> > Aldo
> > - One paragraph about wordnet issues
> > - Sentence or two on Wordnet term URIrefs
> > - Describe maintenance policies for Wordnet
> > - Short paragraph on versioning in Wordnet
> > - One sentence pointing to Wordnet Web documents
> > - Two sentences on Wordnet schemas.
> > - Short paragraph on Wordnet dereferencing policy
> > - Short paragraph on what Wordnet schemas assert.
> > - Annotate Glossary with Wordnet terminology where appropriate
> >
> > Alistair
> > - One paragraph about SKOS
> > - Sentence or two on SKOS term URIrefs
> > - Describe maintenance policies for SKOS
> > - TAG Versioning on "semantic stability"
> > - Short paragraph on versioning in SKOS
> > - What TAG says about versioning
> > - One sentence pointing to SKOS Web documents
> > - Two sentences on SKOS schemas.
> > - Short paragraph on SKOS dereferencing policy
> > - Short paragraph on what SKOS schemas assert.
> > - Discuss alternative ways to model a thesaurus
> > - Annotate Glossary with SKOS terminology where appropriate
> >
> > Bernard
> > - Bullet point on OASIS Published Subjects
> > - What PSI says about identifying terms
> > - What PSI says about maintenance policies
> > - Short paragraph on versioning in PSI
> > - One sentence pointing to PSI Web documents
> > - Two sentences on PSI schemas.
> > - Paragraph on PSI dereferencing policy
> > - Short paragraph on what PSI schemas assert.
> > - Reuse of existing terms in a local context
> > - Annotate Glossary with PSI terminology where appropriate
> >
> > DanBri and/or Libby
> > - One paragraph on FOAF
> > - Bullet point on W3C good-practice documents
> > - Describe W3C usage of the word "namespace"
> > - Define "URI Reference", elaborating in the Glossary
> > - Sentence or two on FOAF term URIrefs
> > - What W3C says about identifying terms
> > - Describe maintenance policies for FOAF
> > - What W3C says about maintenance policies
> > - Short paragraph on versioning in FOAF
> > - One sentence pointing to FOAF Web documents
> > - One sentence pointing to W3C Web documents
> > - Two sentences on FOAF schemas.
> > - Two sentences on W3C schemas.
> > - Short paragraph on FOAF dereferencing policy
> > - Short paragraph on what FOAF schemas assert.
> > - Short paragraph on what W3C schemas assert.
> > - Describe the "vocabulary market"
> > - Formation of URI strings ("hash or slash" etc)
> > - Define URI Reference
> > - Annotate Glossary with FOAF terminology where appropriate
> >
> > James
> > - One page on "vocabularies in Semantic Web"
> >
> > Jeremy (if willing)
> > - Summarize discussion of "social meaning"
> >
> > Natasha
> > - An example of a large-scale ontology?
> >
> > Ralph
> > - Longer paragraph on versioning in W3C
> > - Paragraph or two on W3C dereferencing policy
> > - Annotate Glossary with W3C terminology where appropriate
> >
> > Tom
> > - One paragraph about Dublin Core
> > - Sentence or two on DCMI term URIrefs
> > - A sentence on the "CORES Resolution"
> > - Describe maintenance policies for DCMI
> > - Short paragraph on versioning in DCMI
> > - One sentence pointing to DCMI Web documents
> > - Two sentences on DCMI schemas.
> > - Short paragraph on DCMI dereferencing policy
> > - Short paragraph on what DCMI schemas assert.
> > - DCMI on "terms usable as RDF properties"
> > - Describe the DCMI notion of "application profile"
> > - DCMI endorsing assertions about MARC Relator terms
> > - DCMI guidelines on coining URI references
> > - DCMI perspective on "namespace hosting"
> > - Annotate Glossary with DCMI terminology where appropriate
> >
> > Everyone
> > - Using terms outside of their original contexts
> > - Describe other notions of "application profile"
> > - Comment on the role of the "vocabulary owner"
> > - When and how to declare new or reuse existing terms
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Thomas Baker                        
> Thomas.Baker@izb.fraunhofer.de
> > Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven         mobile 
> +49-160-9664-2129
> > Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft                          work 
> +49-30-8109-9027
> > 53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany                    fax 
> +49-2241-144-2352
> > Personal email: thbaker79@alumni.amherst.edu
> >
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 16:09:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:40 UTC