Re: Two concrete/practical cookbook examples of Semantic Tags

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:

> On 2/4/13 3:40 PM, Paolo Ciccarese wrote:
>
>> Two concrete/practical examples of Semantic Tags.
>> Please, just look at the RDF and the figure, I still working on the text.
>>
>> 1) A DBpedia entry used as semantic tag on an image:
>> http://www.w3.org/community/**openannotation/wiki/SE_**
>> Semantically_Tagging_an_Image<http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/SE_Semantically_Tagging_an_Image>
>> In this case I can attach oa:Tag (oa:SemanticTag?) to the URI directly as
>> it is a DBpedia 'resource.
>>
>> 2) Two URIs used as semantic tags while bookmarking a webpage
>> http://www.w3.org/community/**openannotation/wiki/**
>> Bookmarking_and_Tagging_a_**Webpage#Open_Annotation_**Representation<http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/Bookmarking_and_Tagging_a_Webpage#Open_Annotation_Representation>
>> The URIs also identify the HTML page for those entities so I used the
>> SpecificResource construct as Rob suggested.
>>
>> Should we keep two different constructs?
>> Comments?
>>
>
>
> As already said I don't like the Specific Resource pattern. It messes the
> message of Specific Resources, by letting one think semantic tags can be
> obtained by "refining" a source, the same way that other specifiers do. But
> in the case of semantic tags of course there's nothing analogous to
> selectors, states, etc. Which shows well in your example: there's only
> oa:hasSource attached to your tag, which renders a bit absurd the use of
> the SR pattern.
>
> If one wants to tie a semantic tag to a document that is very closely
> connected to it (one could say the document defines the concept) I'd
> recommend using something else. For example foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf:
> http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#**term_isPrimaryTopicOf<http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_isPrimaryTopicOf>
> Again, I strongly believe trying to address such generic concept/document
> problems into the OA machinery itself can only bring problems.
>

I am not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you suggesting to not
include Semantic Tags?
Could you take one of my examples and rephrase it as you would do it?

Paolo