Re: Questions about TBX to RDF handling

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Peter Svanberg <Peter.Svanberg@tnc.se>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We are running a project in Sweden aiming to make terminology resources
> available as semantic, linked open data. In that work we found your
> document *Guidelines for Linguistic Linked Data Generation: Multilingual
> Terminologies (TBX)* which made us very interested (and surprised). We
> have some questions (and please bear with me – I am new to RDF):
>
> 1.       What is the current status on your guide and specifications? I
> read that it will soon be a final community group report. What happens
> then? Will it be discussions and further revisions?
>
 The specs are released in the sense that we have made them for our project
deliverables. Further, comment/contribution is still welcome.

> 2.       We would like to use cross references in some fields, manly
> definition. TBX allows that through a *hi* element in the value, for
> example (text in Swedish, sorry …):
>
>       <termEntry>
>
>         <langSet xml:lang="sv" id="Bas4711">
>
>           <descrip type="definition">kommersiell <hi
> target="Bas4712">verksamhet</hi> som drivs under ordnade former</descrip>
>
>           <tig>
>
>             <term>företag</term>
>
>           </tig>
>
>         </langSet>
>
>       </termEntry>
>
>
>
> This is by http://tbx2rdf.lider-project.eu/converter/tbx2rdf.html
> converted to
>
>
>
> :Bas4712       a             skos:Concept ;
>
>         tbx:definition  "organisatorisk <hi target=\"Bas4714\">enhet</hi>
> där <hi target=\"Bas4714\">verksamhet</hi> utförs"^^<
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns##XMLLiteral> .
>
>
>
> which I suppose is correct (except the double #, which I corrected).
>
Yep the double hash should be fixed

>
>
> Via http://rdf-translator.appspot.com/ I convert this to RDF/XML:
>
>
>
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.com/Bas4711">
>
>     <tbx:definition rdf:datatype="
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns##XMLLiteral">kommersiell
> &lt;hi target="Bas4712"&gt;verksamhet&lt;/hi&gt; som drivs under ordnade
> former</tbx:definition>
>
>     <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Concept"/>
>
>   </rdf:Description>
>
>
>
> Is this the way to code it? Or should it rather be:
>
>
>
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.com/Bas4711">
>
>     <tbx:definition rdf:parseType="Literal">kommersiell <hi
> target="Bas4712">verksamhet</hi> som drivs under ordnade
> former</tbx:definition>
>
>     <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Concept"/>
>
>   </rdf:Description>
>
>
>
> as in other examples I’ve found in RDF specifications? If the latter,
> where is the error? In the N3 file or in the RDF translator?
>
Both are correct and equivalent.

>
>
> 3.       How would you suggest handling of versioning (revision handling)
> of terminology data? For example if the source of the terminology data is
> revised and some term entries are changed or deleted. Then you must have
> some way of declaring those deleted entries as obsolete, and maybe even
> “deprecated and replaced by …”, with a cross reference.
>
 Generally, OWL's *deprecated* and Dublin Core's *replaces* properties can
be used to express that an RDF entity is no longer valid.

>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Peter Svanberg
>
> The Swedish Centre for Terminology
>
> Solna, Sweden
>
>
>
>
>