Issue-67 - Term + Disambiguation

Hi all,

> - we moved issue-69 disambiguation vs. term forward. 
> My understanding from the conclusion on the call was:
> * people would agree with dropping "granularity" or "qualifier"
> from the data category
> * people would agree with re-naming attributes and the data 
> category: to use "tan" instead of "disambig", e.g. 
> "tan-ident-ref" instead of "disambig-ident-ref". E.g. instead of

I wasn't sure I understood correct during the call and was waiting to see the summary.

So we would go back to the simple 'named entity' requirement we had originally?
Dropping completely lexical and ontology concepts.

I'm curious to see how we'll sell that as a non-substantive change: we're removing features. (I'm not against, just pointing that out).


> * Steps needed anyway for resolving issue-67 are: re-writing 
> the now "tan" section (previously "disambig"), and potentially 
> rewriting / merging "Terminology". Opinions on these topics or 
> volunteers, please step up.

It seems the direction we are taking is to reduce to one the types of data the 'disambig/tan' data category can annotate. Merging Terminology would be the equivalent to go back to have different types of data annotated by the same data category. Then how do we justify to drop lexical and ontology concepts? (especially since there was no comment requesting to drop them).

cheers,
-yves

Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:17:28 UTC