- From: <felix@sasakiatcf.com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2023 18:32:22 +0100
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Cc: Christian Chiarcos <christian.chiarcos@gmail.com>, Jorge Gracia del Río <jogracia@unizar.es>, r12a <ishida@w3.org>, public-bpmlod@w3.org, Addison Phillips <addisonI18N@gmail.com>
Thanks a lot for this pointer, Gregg. The i18n namespace is a great step and maybe 90% of what is needed. Is it also possible to use the i18n namespace with a language tag only? E.g. to have s.t. like [ ex:title "The history of the World Wide Web"^^i18n:en; ] Best, Felix Am 2023-02-07 01:18, schrieb Gregg Kellogg: >> On Feb 2, 2023, at 2:36 AM, felix@sasakiatcf.com wrote: >> >> Dear Christian and all, >> >> I agree that currently there is a disconnect between the >> stakeholders. One technical step to take would be to provide BCP 47 >> identifiers as URIs, ideally even as RDF based URIs, so that others >> can attach to the URIs the missing metadata and re-use them in other >> contexts. >> >> I tried to argue for that in the i18n WG, but we did not proceed so >> far, also or mainly because of responsibilities: who should host >> such URIs, the IETF or W3C or the Unicode consortium? Or should we >> just write a description how to construct the URIs? Maybe this >> thread helps to re-animate the discussion. > > There’s an open issue [1] on planned updates to RDF Concepts from > the RDF-star working group. This considers a couple of ways to handle > text direction in RDF including the Compound Literal [2] and i18n > namespace [3] experimental features from JSON-LD 1.1, which were > constrained by compatibility with RDF 1.1. RDF 1.2 is focused on > making annotations on RDF statements, and there’s a proposal that > could leverage this, in addition to better formalizing the other > mechanisms. I don’t expect the RDF-star group to have too much > bandwidth to focus on this now, but we’ll need to do something for > RDF Concepts and related recommendations (about 21 in all). > > Gregg > > [1] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/issues/9 > [2] > https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/#the-rdf-compoundliteral-class-and-the-rdf-language-and-rdf-direction-properties > [3] https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/#the-i18n-namespace > >> Best, >> >> Felix >> >> Am 2023-02-02 10:58, schrieb Christian Chiarcos: >> Dear Richard, dear all, >> just skimming through your documents, I was wondering how the >> recommended [3] metadata approach looks like in practice. Would the >> general recommendation be to use language indexing [4], then? I see >> some issues with that because the same concept can have multiple >> lexicalizations in the same language (say, "Severe acute respiratory >> syndrome coronavirus 2"@en alongside "SARS‑CoV‑2"@en, "Wuhan >> Corona virus"@en, etc.), but the use of a dict here implies you get >> one string per language max. >> Also, are there any constraints or recommendations about the >> metadata >> vocabulary (apologies if I overlooked) ? From the linguistic side, >> BCP47 has been criticized a lot because people would like to add >> more >> metadata than ISO 632 or BCP47 support (Gillis-Webber & Tittel 2019, >> 2020), BCP47 covers ISO 632-1 and ISO 632-2 only, but not ISO 632-3 >> (which is needed for "smaller" languages), ISO 632-3 is insufficient >> by itself (so that people introduce alternative classifications, >> e.g., >> Nordhoff et al. 2011), and most people seem to actually prefer to >> identify languages by URIs in order to provide explicit metadata (De >> Melo 2015, Nordhoff et al. 2011). >> So far, it seems this discussion in the LLOD community is largely >> detached from the discussion in the W3C Internationalization Working >> Group, but these things should definitely be connected to get the >> perspectives of spec developers, providers and consumers of >> linguistic/language data covered. Thank you for taking the >> initiative! >> Best, >> Christian >> Refs: >> Gillis-Webber, F., & Tittel, S. (2019). The shortcomings of language >> tags for linked data when modeling lesser-known languages. In _2nd >> Conference on Language, Data and Knowledge (LDK 2019)_. Schloss >> Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. >> Gillis-Webber, F., & Tittel, S. (2020, May). A framework for shared >> agreement of language tags beyond ISO 639. In _Proceedings of the >> Twelfth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference_ (pp. >> 3333-3339). >> De Melo, G. (2015). Lexvo. org: Language-related information for the >> linguistic linked data cloud. _Semantic Web_, _6_(4), 393-400. >> Nordhoff, S., & Hammarström, H. (2011). Glottolog/Langdoc: Defining >> dialects, languages, and language families as collections of >> resources. In _First International Workshop on Linked Science >> 2011-In >> conjunction with the International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC >> 2011)_. >> Am Do., 2. Feb. 2023 um 09:57 Uhr schrieb Jorge Gracia del Río >> <jogracia@unizar.es>: >> Dear Richard, >> Thanks for this update! We will certainly take a closer look at the >> report >> Best, >> Jorge >> El mié, 1 feb 2023 a las 18:14, r12a (<ishida@w3.org>) escribió: >> dear BPMLOD folks, >> Best wishes for your relaunch! >> Since the last round of work on BPMLOD the W3C >> Internationalization Working Group has spent a lot of time talking >> with spec developers about how to attach metadata to strings to >> indicate the language and the directionality of the string. For >> example, JSON LD adopted some new approaches to allow the >> management of this information.[1] I wonder whether this is >> something that would be of interest to the BPMLOD group. >> We produced a document called Strings on the Web: Language and >> Direction Metadata (https://w3c.github.io/string-meta/ [1]) which >> gives an overview of our current thinking. >> best regards, >> Richard >> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/#string-internationalization >> [2] > Links: > ------ > [1] > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://w3c.github.io/string-meta/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Rgepxj7QNGkaui_sSstuffPD7xC42Z6-Te9byilqDIDG0ByuYwhfbhg8QcGhfw2zkKknCuRt4oXLKQ$ > [2] > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld11/*string-internationalization__;Iw!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Rgepxj7QNGkaui_sSstuffPD7xC42Z6-Te9byilqDIDG0ByuYwhfbhg8QcGhfw2zkKknCuSeM8ekBQ$ > [3] https://w3c.github.io/string-meta/#language-metadata > [4] https://w3c.github.io/string-meta/#localization-considerations
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2023 17:32:37 UTC