Re: Class of an annotation body

Ray,

I am not sure what you mean.

(1) Do you mean to define a number of additional RDF Classes, so that a body can be 'classified'? Your example for tags is a typical case. RDF(S) gives classification, subclass/superclass relationships, and possibly the usage of rdf:domain and rdf:range for some properties (although the usage of domain and range may be dangerous because its semantics is usually misunderstood).

(2) Do you mean to define a number of additional OWL Classes, so that the body can not only be classified but a number of constraints can be added on the properties on classes, ie, possibly, contradictions can be detected?

I do not see any problem with the (1). It may help some applications to have such a classification, and the sub/superclass relationships are easy to keep track of in an application, too.

(2), however, is a totally different ballgame. It would require the usage of OWL both in terms of authoring and in terms of usage in applications. Given the complexity of OWL and the expected audience for annotation application developers, I would try to keep away from those (although it is of course possible for a specific application or domain to define those classes, if needed).

However, for both (1) and (2) I believe the current OA model is fairly silent on whether additional classes are defined. It is perfectly possible to do so, but the model does not talk about it; and I believe that is the proper choice.

However... I may completely misunderstand what you intend to do. An example would be good.

Ivan

> On 09 Mar 2015, at 15:05 , Denenberg, Ray <rden@loc.gov> wrote:
> 
> In the OA data model, there is no general RDF Class defined for the body.  But that doesn’t mean that the body cannot have an RDF class, for certain typesoa:SemanticTag.   (Those are the only two I can think of from the model, maybe there are others I missed.)
> 
> There is at least one use case that calls for a structured body and thus an RDF Class (Structured Review:  http://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-annotation-uc/#comment-on-publication-title).   And it also seems that there is a certain amount of hand-waving that suggests that bodies are going to need to be structured in many cases but I don’t think we have had direct discussion of this.
> 
> I am in the process of developing a use case along these lines and would like opinions on whether this approach is seen to be legitimate orcontroversy.
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704