- From: Alexandre Passant <alexandre.passant@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 18:49:26 +0000
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
On 3 Nov 2009, at 18:37, Nathan wrote: > Alexandre Passant wrote: >> Hi Nathan, >> On 3 Nov 2009, at 18:16, Nathan wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Hoping for a little bit of guidance here on tagging & assigning >>> subjects to content etc - I can't quite grasp how to describe what >>> an item of content is about; particularly in the context of a >>> normal blog post and with relation to tags/subjects/moat/commontag/ >>> scot etc. >>> >>> In short I've build a little mashup of a few services and some >>> linked data which extracts terms & subjects from an item of >>> content; and now I'm unclear of which ontologies to use. >>> >>> >>> The info I can extract is "tag string" and mainly a dbpedia uri >>> for the tag (to give it real meaning I guess) >>> >>> example.. >>> string: Nuclear program of Iraq >>> URI: http://dbpedia.org/resource/Nuclear_program_of_Iran >>> >>> also bearing in mind that I'll typically have 5-10 of these per >>> "post". >>> >>> On the face of it I'd assume I should be using the following for >>> each "tag" and leaving the string literal value out of the triples >>> altogether >>> http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject >>> http://www.holygoat.co.uk/owl/redwood/0.1/tags/taggedWithTag >>> >>> however, with MOAT/CommonTag/SCOT (and no doubt others) added in >>> to the equation I'm totally lost as which is the most fitting and >>> widely recognised for tagging content in this manner; is it worth >>> adding something to say that it was automatically tagged by a >>> machine? or including the string literal value of the tag(s)? >> SCOT does not directly address the issue of 'tag meaning' but focus >> on modeling tagclouds and making them interoperable. >> MOAT and CommonTag serve the same general purpose (defining what >> tag means, in terms of URIs) so you can use whatever you like - >> however, CommonTag is indexed by SearchMonkey so that is a clearer >> advantage for it and I'd then suggest to use that one if you >> develop an app on the Web. >> A few differences between them however so far (it may evolve in the >> future, with ongoing work on CommonTag) >> - CommonTag provides ways to make the difference between >> ctag:AuthorTag, ctag:ReaderTag and ctag:AutoTag while MOAT just >> make the difference between manual and auto-tag. >> - MOAT models the "tagging action" (i.e. tri/quatri-partite model, >> based on - and extending - the Tag Ontology) and 'global >> meanings' (that can be used if you want to setup a tag server that >> deliver URIs / meanings for each tags, e.g. in a company.) >> Hope that helps, > > cheers, it does.. but also leaves me thinking I need to be using: > dc:subject > tag:taggedWith > ctag:means > moat:tagMeaning > > surely this is an issue if they're all essentially the same? > > and leads me to a further question.. is there any way to express > that [dc:subject tag:taggedWith ctag:means moat:tagMeaning] are all > equal? They are actually not the same. The relationships ctag:means and moat:tagMeaning are used to define links between a tag and its meaning, not for linking the tagged resource to the meaning of the tag. For that direct relationship , ctag:isAbout is the appropriate relationship (I'm just realizing it's not in the doc but in the ontology only [1]). There is also moat:taggedWith that serve a similar purpose. In addition, tag:taggedWith is there to link a resource to a tag, not to the URI that serves as a meaning for this tag. Finally, regarding dc:subject, a tag can be used not as a subject (think of a webpage tagged "cool" or "todo", they are probably not used as subject) so the semantics of dc:subject is probably not what you want here. However, this property can be enough if you know that the tags used are here as subject / topics. Best, Alex. > > thanks again, > > nathan > -- Dr. Alexandre Passant Digital Enterprise Research Institute National University of Ireland, Galway :me owl:sameAs <http://apassant.net/alex> .
Received on Tuesday, 3 November 2009 18:50:11 UTC