- From: Lutz Suhrbier <l.suhrbier@bgbm.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:00:23 +0200
- To: Leyla Jael García Castro <leylajael@gmail.com>, paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com
- CC: public-openannotation@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5028FA67.1000100@bgbm.org>
Hi Leyla and Paolo, please find attached the export of the very simple model from my Annotation JUnit-Test in rdf-xml and N3. It simply creates two types of Agents and Institutions, serving as annotator and generator of a single "meta" annotation, which include a single "sub" annotion which The annotation is about a source target with the URI "urn:guid:BGBM:Bridel+Herbar:Bridel-1-12:1344860699609:http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tdwg.org%2Fschemas%2Fabcd%2F2.06". The "meta" - annotation URI is urn:guid:bgbm:annosys:1344860701104:1344860701104. The "sub"annotation outlining the XPath within the source target XML document is urn:guid:bgbm:annosys:1344860701292:1344860701292, and uses the hasSemantic Tag pointing at the enclosing "meta"-annotation. The specific Target describing the XML Element within source target is urn:guid:bgbm:annosys:1344860701296:1344860701296. Furthermore, I introduced a XPath selector called <oax:xpath>, which simply includes an XPath expression to describe the XML element to be annotated. The body of each "sub" annotation (XML Element annotation) may comprise a new value and/or a comment related to the annotated XML element. I hope, my explication is not too complicated. If you have any questions, please come back to me. BTW. As I am quite new to RDF, what tool are you using to visualise all the RDF graphs in your documentation ? Protegé ? Thanks Lutz > Hi Lutz, > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Lutz Suhrbier <l.suhrbier@bgbm.org > <mailto:l.suhrbier@bgbm.org>> wrote: > > Hi, > > I am currently trying to adopt OA to an application scenario, > which I actually didn't found described here. > > The plan is to annotate XML documents in a way that the annotation > relates one or more XML element values(let's call them > subannotations), which can be given a domain specific annotation type. > > > So, if I understand well, you have one annotation A1 and another one > A2 and you want to create an annotation to relate them? Are you using > predefined relations? or will you allow people to define the relation > on the fly? for instance, using the body of the annotation as the > suggested name for the relation. > > We have worked on a similar scenario but it is not yet compatible with > OA. Anyway, if you provide some more information, maybe as Paolo > suggests an example, it would make easier to understand better your > scenario. > > cheers, > > Leyla > > > As the target selection of subannotations(XML Elements) can be > realised by the usage of multiple specific targets in combination > with fragment selectors, there is no obvious and standard conform > way of assigning individual annotated values(bodies) to the > selected targets. > > Currently, I implemented a workaround by applicating the > oax:hasSemanticTag predicate to each subannotation "pointing" at > an embracing "meta" annotation. > Even though that workaround appears to be doing its job, I am > wondering > 1) if that is the intended way of using hasSemanticTag ? > 2) if there is no other standard conform method reflecting that > scenario which can actually reflect those requirements ? > > With regard to a potential approach to be integrated within the > standard, simply allowing multiple targets and multiple bodies > does not appear to solve that question adequately, as the > relationship between the specific target and the body > (subannotation) would not be reflected. As the crucial point is > the relationship between target and body, a target predicate like > "hasBody" would be a better approach, at least from my > perspective. One may even think about moving the "hasBody" > predicate from oa:annotation to oa:target, as I see no relevant > application of having annotations just consisting of a body > without any target ? > > Anyway, doing so should not hinder any otherwise possible logical > construction of annotations, or does it ? Also, it does not > preclude annotations having targets pointing at the same body, nor > does it preclude targets having multiple bodies if the discussion > shows that this is somewhat useful. > > I have to mention, that this is my first project using RDF or OA, > so may be I am in some topic completely misleaded. But I would > appreciate if my point could be somehow discussed and reflected in > an upcoming release of the standard. > > best regards > Lutz Suhrbier > > > >
Attachments
- text/plain attachment: AnnotationTest.n3
- text/xml attachment: AnnotationTest.xml
Received on Monday, 13 August 2012 13:00:53 UTC