Re: progress on release of first specification of ontolex

Hi Philipp,

The final specification already has a recommendation for language
identifiers:

>
> Beyond using the *ontolex:language* property, which has a Literal as a
> range, it is recommended to use the Dublin Core *language* property with
> reference to either LexVo <http://www.lexvo.org/> or The Library of
> Congress Vocabulary <http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-1.html>
>
>    - LexVo codes should be of the form
>    http://www.lexvo.org/page/iso639-3/xxx where xxx is the 3-Letter ISO
>    639-3 code
>
>
>    - Library of Congress codes should be of the form
>    http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-1/xx where xx is the 2-Letter ISO
>    639-1 code
>
> It seems that lime/example1 does not follow this, and should be fixed to
do so.

Regards,
John

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Gerard de Melo <gdemelo@mpi-inf.mpg.de>
wrote:

> Hi Philipp,
>
> For Lexvo.org, you can either use 3-letter ISO 639-3 codes such as
>
>         http://lexvo.org/id/iso639-3/eng
>
> or 2-letter ISO 639-1 codes such as
>
>         http://lexvo.org/id/iso639-1/en
>
> Gerard
>
>
> On 2015-11-5 17:03, Philipp Cimiano wrote:
> > And one small thing:
> >
> > in many examples we use the dublin core terms property "language" to
> > express language information.
> >
> > Sometimes we use "eng" and "en" as language identifier (local name) with
> > respect to the LOC and LEXVO datasets.
> >
> > It seems to me that there are some mistakes here.
> >
> > It seems that LOC uses "eng" and LEXVO uses "en".
> >
> > For instance:
> >
> > http://www.lexvo.org/page/iso639-1/eng -> does not resolve property,
> while
> >
> > http://www.lexvo.org/page/iso639-1/en -> does resolve
> >
> > On the other hand:
> >
> > http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-2/en -> does not resolve, while
> >
> > http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-2/eng -> does resolve
> >
> > Thus, in all examples we should use:
> >
> > lexvo:en and loc:eng to indicate language information.
> >
> > A minor thing, but still...
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Philipp.
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 05.11.15 um 09:38 schrieb Philipp Cimiano:
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >>  apologies for my silence in the last weeks. I have been distracted by
> >> many other things in October. Now I am working on the release of the
> >> ontolex spec with high priority. I have worked through all the
> >> normative sections of the specification. There are smaller issues that
> >> I will clarify with the main stakeholders of these modules directly.
> >>
> >> It is now time to have a final check of the spec if you want.
> >>
> >> I am confident that I will finish the thorough check of the model in
> >> the next few weeks.
> >>
> >> I will then give all the opportunity of doing a final check in the
> >> first two weeks of December.
> >>
> >> We will then release the specification of the model this year.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Philipp.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>