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

Re: AW: [all] revision to disambiguation text

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 20:12:38 +0100
Message-ID: <CAL58czp+s9Bhxk0fVxOe_abKQ3r2TPA1oXJMJdOqNF8tdM+hdg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Karl Fritsche <karl.fritsche@cocomore.com>
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Thanks a lot for this, Karl. I tried to implement the changes, please have
a look.

Best,

Felix

2012/10/29 Karl Fritsche <karl.fritsche@cocomore.com>

> Hi all,
>
> only want to point out a minor issue with the HTML+RDFa Example (Example
> 55) in disambiguation.
>
> - the <link>-tag to the its rules are missing
> - is the ITS-prefix in the <body> needed?
> - I think the property should be http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name**,
> because the default RDFa NS (http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/**vocab#<http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#>)
> has no name property and another @vocab is not defined
> - in my mind in this example resource should be replaced with about,
> because dbpedia:Dublin is the subject?
>
> Cheers,
> Karl
>
>
> On 18.10.2012 15:31, Tadej Štajner wrote:
>
>> Hi Yves,
>>
>> On 18. 10. 2012 15:08, Yves Savourel wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tadej, all,
>>>
>>> Currently we have: in the global section of disambiguation:
>>>
>>> - Using disambigSource and disambigIdent to specify the collection and
>>> the identifier itself.
>>> - Using one of disambigIdentRef, disambigIdentPointer or
>>> disambigIdentRefPointer using a URI for the disambiguation target.
>>>
>>> It seems it should be:
>>>
>>> - Using disambigSource and one of disambigIdent or disambigIdentPointer
>>> to specify the collection and the identifier itself.
>>> - Using one of disambigIdentRef or disambigIdentRefPointer using a URI
>>> for the disambiguation target.
>>>
>> I declared disambigIdentPointer since I was going from the ITS1.0
>> patterns, where this was intended to cover the case where one would declare
>> the entity within the same document. I don't expect this style to be used
>> often. Initially, didn't spot this ambiguity and the resulting side effects
>> when we also allow a non-URI identifier. I would say that the second
>> version makes more sense.
>>
>>  Sorry, I'm being slow and having a bit of a hard time to understand what
>>> combinations of attribute are allowed. My understanding so far was that you
>>> could have:
>>>
>>> - class (and possibly granularity)
>>> - and either source+ident or identRef
>>>
>>
>> Type class and granularity are optional. The mutual exclusivity only
>> applies with the addressing modes (source + ident* vs. identRef*). Your
>> example below is correct - the rules should say that one must use one of
>> these two possibilities.
>>
>> -- Tadej
>>
>>
>>> But the example 53 should a case with no class.
>>>
>>> The way the global attributes are defined currently is such that the
>>> disambiguation rule could have just the selector :)
>>>
>>> Are the possibilities:
>>>
>>> - Either source + ident (+ optionally claas) (+ optionally granularity)
>>> - Or just identRef (+ optionally claas) (+ optionally granularity)
>>>
>>> Or some other combinations?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -yves
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>


-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Monday, 29 October 2012 19:13:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:56 UTC