Re: [LD4LT] annotations on the web: quick survey

Another note on this.

In the past, I also realized that anybody working with RDF still builds 
these things for themselves: Links, Schema mappings, Mappers and 
Converters.

Databus as a platform should handle this in the future:

# Links

We started building a global IRI index, which you can see here:

https://global.dbpedia.org/id/2nrbo

https://global.dbpedia.org/same-thing/lookup/?uri=http://it.dbpedia.org/resource/Geometria

We will soon build something where you can manage links on the web 
centrally, not asymmetrically.

# Mappings

Same cluster engine adapted from the ID Management index for vocabularies

# Mappers

e.g. Construct {?s <https://schema.org/birthDate> ?o } {?s dbo:birthDate 
?o }

DBpedia as Schema.org

These can be attached to ontologies, which are loaded on the bus or 
auto-generated from the Mappings

# Converters

i.e. download *.nt.bz2 as *.ttl.gz


Databus is a semantic web in a bottle and we will build a client for it 
that has operations like:

a) Download these 10 datasets as tt.gz

b) Download these 10 datasets into Virtuoso: 
http://dev.dbpedia.org/Data#example-application-virtuoso-docker while 
mapping 5 of them to DBpedia Ontology and normalise IRIs to 
global.dbpedia.org where possible and converting one from csv to rdf 
with mapping X


So in the future, one user can upload a NIF dataset to the bus, then 
another user can upload a mapper NIF-WebAnnotations to the bus and then 
the client can convert it for everybody.

Currently the client can already:

* handle any compression

* parse and convert all RDF formats

* load any RDF into docker versions of Virtuoso and Lucene/SOLR

So in the future there is really no need for the publisher to implement 
content negotiation over LD or anything like your web browser handles 
the HTML tag soups on the web.

-- Sebastian










On 11.07.19 09:46, Christian Chiarcos wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> in the last decade, we have seen the emergence of several 
> specifications for creating and sharing (NLP) annotations on the web 
> in a linked-data compliant fashion, most importantly,
> - NIF 2.0 (https://persistence.uni-leipzig.org/nlp2rdf/, stable),
> - NIF 2.1 (https://nif.readthedocs.io/en/latest/, experimental) and
> - Web Annotation (https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/, standardized).
>
> In the context of the Pret-a-LLOD project 
> (https://www.pret-a-llod.eu/), we are currently developing a toolbox 
> for the transformation of legacy annotations, resp., the output of 
> serveral NLP tools, and we need to make some strategic decisions to 
> what extent to support, and possibly, to extend any of these vocabularies.
>
> In my personal impression, Web Annotation gained a lot of ground in 
> the last years, and beyond BioNL (where it emerged), it is now much 
> used in Digital Humanities, for example. My feeling is that NIF 
> (albeit there *are* external providers of NIF data) has been somewhat 
> less successful in broadening its range of users since 2015, but I 
> might miss something.
>
> I understand that NIF 2.0/2.1 are to some extent outcomes of the 
> activities of this group, so I was wondering how much it is still 
> being used by the people in this community. In particular, I would 
> like to know:
>
> - Do you run or know about WA compliant web services (public or 
> in-house)?
> - Do you run or know about any NIF 2.0 web services (public or in-house)?
> - Do you run or know about any NIF web services that actively use the 
> NIF 2.1 extensions?
> - Do you provide or know about WA-compliant data sets available on the 
> web under an open license?
> - Do you provide or know about NIF 2.0-compliant data available on the 
> web under an open license?
> - Do you provide or know about any NIF data sets that actively use the 
> NIF 2.1 extensions?
> - Do you provide web services or data sets that use other 
> LD-compliant* vocabularies for linguistic annotations (e.g., the LAPPS 
> Interchange Format)?
> - For resources/webservices developed since 2014: Do you provide web 
> services or interlinked data sets using other, non-LD compliant 
> vocabularies for linguistic annotations (e.g., Concrete, or JSON-NLP)? 
> If so, what has been your motivation for doing so? If the reason was 
> the range of available tools, which functionalities were most important?
>
> * By LD compliancy I mean full-fledged RDF in any serialization (incl. 
> CSV2RDF, JSON-LD or access via a SPARQL end point), not just the use 
> of URIs (which is far too common to count).
>
> Please feel free to respond via the mailing list or to contact me 
> privately. I plan to post a summary of private responses in that case. 
> Note that this is not about abandoning NIF, but about exporing its 
> future relationship and possible synergies with WebAnnotation and 
> other vocabularies.
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Christian
> -- 
> Christian Chiarcos
> Applied Computational Linguistics
> Johann Wolfgang Goethe Universität Frankfurt a. M.
> 60054 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
>
> office: Robert-Mayer-Str. 11-15, room 107
> mail: chiarcos@informatik.uni-frankfurt.de 
> <mailto:chiarcos@informatik.uni-frankfurt.de>
> web: http://acoli.cs.uni-frankfurt.de
> tel: +49-(0)69-798-22463
> fax: +49-(0)69-798-28931
-- 
All the best,
Sebastian Hellmann

Director of Knowledge Integration and Linked Data Technologies (KILT) 
Competence Center
at the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) at Leipzig University
Executive Director of the DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://nlp2rdf.org, 
http://linguistics.okfn.org, https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt 
<http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt>
Homepage: http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann
Research Group: http://aksw.org