- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 14:43:54 +0100
- To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
- CC: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Dear all, Today I had a (live) discussion with Rob Sanderson, chair of the Web Annotation WG, about Action-208 [1] to see whether they would consider adding our dqv:qualityAssessment instance of oa:Motivation [2] in their centralized list of motivations [3]. Rob's answer is that for now it seems better for us to keep our motivation in our namespace. From the semantic perspective, dqv:qualityAssessment is related to oa:moderating that is defined as [ The motivation for when the user intends to assign some value or quality to the Target. For example annotating an Annotation to moderate it up in a trust network or threaded discussion. ] It is not clear however whether dqv:qualityassessment is a direct specialization of oa:moderating, though (ie. whether there should be a skos:broader between the two). There could be some DQV cases that don't fit... So we agreed for the moment skos:closeMatch could be safer. I've updated our DQV RDF file [4] trying to follow the WA recommendations for extending motivations [5]. We will probably have to re-examine the two aspect of the discussion (i.e. inclusion of our motivation in oa:, and relation between the two motivations) later in the new year. I believe this would naturally happen when we come back to another WA motivation-related discussion [6]. Best, Antoine [1] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/208 [2] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#Class:QualityAnnotation [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#creation-reason [4] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/dqv.ttl [5]http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#extending-motivations [6] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/201
Received on Friday, 11 December 2015 13:44:28 UTC