Questions about TBX to RDF handling


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?

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 ...):
        <langSet xml:lang="sv" id="Bas4711">
          <descrip type="definition">kommersiell <hi target="Bas4712">verksamhet</hi> som drivs under ordnade former</descrip>

This is by converted to

:Bas4712       a             skos:Concept ;
        tbx:definition  "organisatorisk <hi target=\"Bas4714\">enhet</hi> där <hi target=\"Bas4714\">verksamhet</hi> utförs"^^<> .

which I suppose is correct (except the double #, which I corrected).

Via I convert this to RDF/XML:

  <rdf:Description rdf:about="">
    <tbx:definition rdf:datatype="">kommersiell &lt;hi target="Bas4712"&gt;verksamhet&lt;/hi&gt; som drivs under ordnade former</tbx:definition>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource=""/>

Is this the way to code it? Or should it rather be:

  <rdf:Description rdf:about="">
    <tbx:definition rdf:parseType="Literal">kommersiell <hi target="Bas4712">verksamhet</hi> som drivs under ordnade former</tbx:definition>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource=""/>

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?

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.

Best Regards,

Peter Svanberg
The Swedish Centre for Terminology
Solna, Sweden

Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2015 13:29:31 UTC