- From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 14:34:18 -0600
- To: Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
- Cc: Jacco van Ossenbruggen <Jacco.van.Ossenbruggen@cwi.nl>, public-openannotation@w3.org
Hi Bob, The motivation is the association of resources. It happens that one resource is a Person, but that doesn't require a separate class of AssociatedPersonAnnotation to determine, as Gustav Eiffel is an instance of Person. Similarly, if someone wanted to associate a Gene, or a Painting, or a Color. We don't want to duplicate every single conceivable class into an associated(thing)annotation. Or worse, PersonAssociatedWithEventAnnotation! :) The extension lists several high level motivations: http://www.openannotation.org/spec/extension/#Classes Depiction could be a new one, if Description has an overwhelmingly textual connotation. Rob On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com> wrote: > Rob-- > > I'm confused by your answer. > > http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/#Motivation says that only > subclasses of oa:Annotation are motivations. Doesn't this require > that if Jacco's "roles" are to be considered motivations, then they > must be modelled as subclasses, such as the AssociatedPersonClass you > say he doesn't need? > > > Bob Morris > > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Jacco, >> >> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Jacco van Ossenbruggen >> <Jacco.van.Ossenbruggen@cwi.nl> wrote: >> >>> I think the Eiffeltower example at [1] is pretty close to what I need. But >>> let's suppose I need a little more and want to explicitly assign different >>> "roles" to my annotations, say the "depicted object" role (the Eiffel >>> Tower), the "associated event" role (e.g. the 1889 World Fair) and the >>> "associated person" role (e.g. Gustave Eiffel). >> >> We've considered that the "role" in this case is a motivation -- >> you're creating an association between the resources via the >> annotation. I think, if I understand the question correctly, that the >> other information can be covered by simply assigning a class to the >> tag? >> >> For example, if you said that (Gustave Eiffel) was a Person, then it's >> clear that he's an associated (via the annotation) person, and we >> don't need a new class for AssociatedPersonAnnotation. >> >> I would think that Description could be used for the depiction case, >> but maybe it would be clearer if there was a separate oax:Depiction >> class? >> >> Hope that helps! >> >> Rob >> > > > > -- > Robert A. Morris > > Emeritus Professor of Computer Science > UMASS-Boston > 100 Morrissey Blvd > Boston, MA 02125-3390 > > IT Staff > Filtered Push Project > Harvard University Herbaria > Harvard University > > email: morris.bob@gmail.com > web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/ > web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush > http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram > === > The content of this communication is made entirely on my > own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express > official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or > Harvard University.
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 20:34:47 UTC