W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > October 2012

Re: [ISSUE-22] Provenance and Agents

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 20:22:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL58czpwiW1PwCmRmX7K8fq=MsmgsAPe9kdrF4TEPLsiMfKrmg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi Dave, all,

I added the translation provenance agent to
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#translation-agent-provenance
with a big warning that this is in an early stage. I changed a few things
from your draft:

- XPath expressions in pointer attributes in the example:  these were quite
general; e.g. //dc:creator selects all "dc:creator" elements in the
document. Esp. given the discussion we just have here
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Oct/0179.html
this seems to be too general

- XPath expression in the selector, e.g.
"selector="/html/body/legalnotice"" > "selector="/text/body/legalnotice""
I changed "/html/body/par" to "/text/body/par[1]", so that here only the
first "par" element is selected. I realized here again that we haven't
resolved the "tool many global rules" issue. Dave, can you take up this
thread
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Oct/0093.html
Because depending on the outcome both provenance and many other data
categories might change a lot

- I removed local XPath expressions, e.g. transToolPointer or
transToolRefPointer attributes. We don't have local XPath - that has been
discussed several times. If needed I can dig up the threads again, but it
would save a lot of time if we could just agree on this.

- I changed the local example. What you tried in the local example was a
combination of global and local provenance information. But that doesn't
work: we said now several times that overriding is always complete. So you
cannot "through a local selection overriding part of the global rule.". You
will override the complete rule. It doesn't matter whether the local
attributes are in HTML5 or in XML, that doesn't change overriding.

In general I'm quite frustrated about the data category. The issue is not
the pieces of information itself; what you specify (person, organization,
tools) makes a lot of sense. The issue is that obviously the specification
is not implementation driven, as can be seen by the non tested XPath
expressions and the overriding that wouldn't work, even with a conformance
only processor.

The other frustration comes from the speed and continuation of progress: to
wrap this up we need a continuous discussion. So my main question is: will
you and Phil have time to engage in this by the end of November, that is
within the last call period? Or: can we engage somebody else interested in
implementing this?

Now, about the data category in general ...

I think what you are trying to achieve is:
conveying several pieces of provenance information for agents:
initial revision = translation agent provenance;
subsequent revision = translation revision agent provenance;
complex revision information: standoff provenance.

We may have a similar picture like with quality issue: the complexity of
this information might be better dealt with a standoff approach. I am not
talking about the standoff approach in your example, Dave, but something
like this:

[

<text xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:its="
http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its"
    its:version="2.0">
    <head>
        <dc:creator>John Doe</dc:creator>
        <title>Translation Revision Provenance Agent: Global Test in XML
</title>
        <its:translationProvenanceRecords>
            <its:translationProvenanceRecord xml:id="tp1"
                transToolRef="http://www.onlinemtex.com/2012/7/25/wsdl/"transOrg
="acme-CAT-v2.3"/>
            <its:translationProvenanceRecord xml:id="tp2" transPerson="John
Doe"
                transOrgRef="http://www.legaltrans-ex.com/"/>
            <its:translationProvenanceRecord xml:id="tp3" transPerson="Carl
Meyer"
                transOrgRef="http://www.mytranslations.example.com/"/>
            <its:translationProvenanceRecord xml:id="tp4" provRef="
http://www.examplemtservice.com/prov/e76547"/>
        </its:translationProvenanceRecords>
    </head>
    <body>
        <par its:transProvRef="#tp1"> This paragraph was translated from
the machine.</par>
        <legalnotice postediting-by="http://www.vistatec.com/"its:transProvRef
="#tp2 #tp3 #tp4">This text was
            translated directly by a person.</legalnotice>
    </body>
</text>
]

The interaction between "its:translationProvenanceRecords" and the
local its:transProvRef attribute is identical to "its:locQualityIssues" and
"its:locQualityIssuesRef" attribute.

In its:translationProvenanceRecords you have a list of
"its:translationProvenanceRecord" elements. Each element has an "xml:id"
attribute. We could say that the order of "its:translationProvenanceRecord"
specifies whether this is translation agent provenance or revision agent
provenance information. Or we could say that this is specified by the order
of the values in "its:transProfRev". ”Your" standoff data category could be
accommodated by <its:translationProvenanceRecord xml:id="tp4" provRef="
http://www.examplemtservice.com/prov/e76547"/>.

You seem to have the use case of attaching several pieces of provenance
information to the same node. With the ITS overriding that is not possible.
But with the above approach tools can still do that, locally:
- first tool creates
<legalnotice postediting-by="http://www.vistatec.com/" its:transProvRef=
"#tp2">This text was
            translated directly by a person.</legalnotice>
- second tool creates
<legalnotice postediting-by="http://www.vistatec.com/" its:transProvRef="#tp2
#tp3">This text was
            translated directly by a person.</legalnotice>
- third tool creates
<legalnotice postediting-by="http://www.vistatec.com/" its:transProvRef="#tp2
#tp3 #tp4">This text was
            translated directly by a person.</legalnotice>

This all works without global "adding" rules (but keeping the pointer
attributes in global rules). We just need guidance for the tool developers
how to attach such complex pieces of information.

Also, for the simple local case we could still have
<legalnotice postediting-by="http://www.vistatec.com/" its:transPerson="John
Doe"
                its:transOrgRef="http://www.legaltrans-ex.com/" its:provRef=
"http://www.examplemtservice.com/prov/e76547">This text was translated
directly by a person.</legalnotice>

But would say that you either have local markup or the external record, not
both.

So in summary, above proposal would mean
- have only one provenance data category
- realize the need of specifying initial translation provenance, revision
and standoff provenance at the same time like this: having lq issue like
standoff elements
- realize the need of providing several pieces of information via several
references to provenance records, e.g. its:transProvRef="#tp2 #tp3"
- have global rules only for pointing, see the other thread.

Best,

Felix

2012/10/12 Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>

>  Hi All,
> Please find attached updates to the provenance related data categories
> ready to be included in the draft. Many thanks to Phil for reviewing these
> in detail.
>
> There are three separate data categories:
> - Translation Agent Provenance: which record machines, people and
> organsiations responsible for translating the selected text
>
> - Translation Agent Provenance: which records machines, people and
> organsiations responsible for revising the translation the selected text
> (e.g. from posteding or linguistic review)
>
> - Standoff Provenance: which provides a link to standoff provenance record
> using the W3C PROV standard.
>
> Comments welcome.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>
> -
>



-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Sunday, 14 October 2012 18:22:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:55 UTC