- From: Bradley Allen <bradley.p.allen@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 16:46:09 -0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, public-html-data-tf@w3.org
Hixie- Allow me to try and describe a real, existing use case. There are a number of ongoing efforts to support the annotation of a scientific article together with the ability to specify the rhetorical structure of a given article. The purpose is to support the evaluation of a given scientific work to determine whether or not it is supported by the evidence, and is consistent with related work in the field. To quote http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/NOTE-hcls-swan-20091020/: "Developing cures for highly complex diseases, such as neurodegenerative disorders, requires extensive interdisciplinary collaboration and exchange of biomedical information in context. Our ability to exchange such information across sub-specialties today is limited by the current scientific knowledge ecosystem’s inability to properly contextualize and integrate data and discourse in machine-interpretable form. This inherently limits the productivity of research and the progress toward cures for devastating diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s." Vocabularies have been defined to this purpose, and they are gaining acceptance within the community of workers in the bioinformatics domain as a legitimate standard for expressing sharable metadata about scientific publications and statements made within them. Two such vocabularies are: SWAN: AO: swan:Hypothesis ao:Annotation SWAN provides a vocabulary for describing scientific hypotheses; AO provides a vocabulary for annotation of scholarly documents. They are distinct vocabularies. Due to their highly technical nature, they are unlikely to be specializations of any meaningful class within schema.org. Furthermore, tools and workflows have been created to produce and consume content marked up with these vocabularies, to provide support for peer review and collaborative research, for example in the context of communities like alzforum.org. As a publisher of scientific content, HTML5 with microdata would be a valuable delivery format for scholarly content marked up with such structured data. What I would like to do, in that case is be able to express the following: <p itemscope itemtype="http://example.org/feline"> </p> One could, I suppose, simply extend Thing, as in: http://schema.org/Thing/Annotation http://schema.org/Thing/Hypothesis Bradley P. Allen http://bradleypallen.org On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote: >> >> I'm not targetting any particular software, I just want to make my data >> available for whoever wants to use it. > > HTML (and the microdata parts of HTML) is definitely not designed for > non-existent hypothetical use cases. There's no way to design good > solutions for use cases until we know what the real problems are. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 13 October 2011 23:46:48 UTC