- From: Bradley Allen <bradley.p.allen@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 16:47:57 -0700
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, public-html-data-tf@w3.org
Oops; that's what I get for trying to edit a lengthy email like this in Gmail. Apologies, and please bear with me while I clean this up. - cheers, BPA Bradley P. Allen http://bradleypallen.org On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Bradley Allen <bradley.p.allen@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 23:48:35 UTC