W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpmlod@w3.org > February 2014

Re: Workflows for localizing RDF (Fwd: Fwd: "Organization Ontology" Japanese translation available)

From: <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 23:29:54 +0000
Message-ID: <52F80F72.1040206@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, "John P. McCrae" <jmccrae@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
CC: public-bpmlod@w3.org
Hi Felix,
Thanks for the example, it really helps ground the discussion, and the 
role of XLIFF skeletons for capturing context for translation.

Could you explain for me a bit the role of the 'dummy_for_its_1' name 
space declarations in the skl element?

- To take this further, should we start a specific section in the 
BP-MLOD wiki on the internationalsiation and localsiaiton of ontologies, 
discussing the use of labels, the workflow and extraction into and 
merging from XLIFF and use of ITS within that workflow? It would be 
useful then to get input/feedback from those involved in authoring and 
translating the like of DCAT and the organisation ontology.

- Is there some best practice established from MONNET already that we 
could distill usefully into this?


On 07/02/2014 13:01, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>> So this is more-or-less what we did as a baseline in Monnet (although 
>> plain text instead of XLIFF). The key issue with this approach is 
>> that you lose the context of the ontology when you are translating, 
>> which can be a problem when you have very short labels for your 
>> concepts that are highly ambiguous. I am not sure how much of this 
>> context can be captured with XLIFF.
> See the example file I have sent around. It has a skeleton file that 
> provides at least some context.
> Best,
> Felix
Received on Sunday, 9 February 2014 23:30:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:41 UTC