Re: New Web Annotation motivation for (data quality) assessment?

>>>> Yes what you describe is what we're asking. With the important nuance is that if you don't want to do it (and I understand the reasons you write) we would still need a more general 'assessment' motivation, so we can attach the motivation in the DQV namespace to something in the WA namespace using skos:broader, as it would fit for a good extension of the WA motivations.
>>>
>>> I am not sure I understand that. If the DQV document defines the (dqv:dataQualityAssessment rdf:type oa:Motivation) triple, why isn't that enough for your purposes?
>>>
>>
>> I am trying here to have DQV comply with the recommendations on extending motivations:
>> "The skos:broader relationship SHOULD be asserted between the new Motivation and at least one existing Motivation, if there are any that are broader in scope." [1]
>
> O.k. But, I believe, this should also be done by the DQV authors, they define the new motivation. It is of course a genuine question whether this motivation can be attached to any of "our" motivations. If the answer is no, then we can either get into a discussion on what type of new motivation we should define for that purpose, or simply drop the skos:broader in that case (hence a SHOULD not a MUST…). But the initiative should still come from the DQV side, in  my view.
>


The new, more general motivation would be 'assessment', 'evaluation' or 'rating'. When trying to find a skos:broader for our motivation dqv:qualityAssessment, I was actually quite surprised not to find anything like this in WA. This is not a common annotation use case? In fact the definition of the existing oa:moderating Moderation [1] has a bit of this, but the label is really much more specific than what would expect for a general assessment.

Antoine

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#motivation-and-purpose

Received on Friday, 27 May 2016 11:09:20 UTC