Re: [web-annotation] Language Literals not supported within the Body

@iherman 

1. Yes ... this is also our question which approach should be used to 
embed multilingual texts in the annotation body? The current examples 
include only "mono"-lingual texts, and this is not enough for our 
usecase. We aim at being compliant with the standard, and we want to 
avoid extending the context.

2.   If I got it right with dc language you mean using “language”, 
instead of “@language”. Well ... that is not that much the problem 
from my point of view.  However by taking a look in the 
string-internationalization, in the json-ld, I saw first that the 
section is non-normative, and secondly I saw that in examples there 
are several different way to embed “language-maps”. 
https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#string-internationalization
a)      Example 31 is actually monolingual.  
b)      Example 32 is only bilingual , in the sense the it uses “ja” 
or “null”.  I also don’t like the idea to use embedded “@context” 
elements for resetting the language.
c)      Example 33, seems to be the one that is very close to the 
“text@language” format used in turtle. But again this overloads 
massively the context, and more than that for every multilingual 
field. That’s a total no go from my side.
d)       Example 34 is the most natural and compact representation for
 end users. However, this still requires to add "@container": 
"@language" in the context (for the “text” property I assume)
e)      Example 35 and 36 are exactly the representations discussed in
 the previous comments in this thread...  
So ... by looking as these options,  I think that the question is 
still open. Which should be the preffered solution?
3. I think that in the context of Web (& annotations) the String 
internationalization is very important and I would be glad if the WA 
standard proposes a normative solution for it. Don’t you agree on 
this? 


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by gsergiu
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/149#issuecomment-183769804
 using your GitHub account

Received on Saturday, 13 February 2016 23:01:39 UTC