W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Bodies translations: use cases and thoughts

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:25:49 -0500
Message-ID: <CABevsUGn4VyxyxOc-fG1y+e2-OcrbosbkeK1+kqKqLoE=vRoSA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
Cc: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
Hi Paolo and all,

(full disclosure, Paolo and I are together at W3C workshop in NY)

> 1) Translations "by oa:Choice". This seems well representing those cases in
> which we are modeling an actual choice.

Yup, the implication is that only one of the translations should be
displayed. The motivation should be commenting or similar, but for
other motivations Choice may not be appropriate.  For example, text
tagging with translations of the tag (as opposed to semantic tagging),
really each of the translations is important individually ...

> However, it does not seem fitting the above use case where all the
> translations are meant to be provided at the same time.
> So I wonder what you think about:
>
>  _:x a oa:Annotation ;
>     oa:motivatedBy blah:translating
>     oa:hasBody <comment-in-english> ;
>     oa:hasBody <comment-in-spanish> .
>     oa:hasTarget <ny-times-article> .

.. whereas in this version all of the Bodies would be processed
individually, which is how tags (and other scenarios) are likely
intended.

The major semantic difference seems to me to be similar to conceptual
work versus individual items: the choice represents, in a way, the
Work and to get to some representation of it, you need to resolve the
choice.  The individuals skip over that and just associate the items
directly.

Some other implications, off the top of my head: the Choice has to be
there when the Annotation is created or a new version of the
Annotation generated later that replaces it, whereas the multiple
bodies approach can be more easily added.


> 2) Translate "by multilingual body":
> _:x a oa:Annotation ;
>    oa:hasBody <multilingualcomment> ;
>    oa:hasTarget <ny-times-article> .
> <multilingualcomment> rdfs:label "comment-in-french"@fr ;
>    rdfs:label "comment-in-english"@en ;
>    rdfs:label "comment-in-spanish"@es .
>
> This could look more explicit, however it introduces a new kind of Body.

Yes.

This seems also related to State: in order to obtain the correct
representation (differentiated via language) on the web, you would
send an Accept-Language header to a negotiable resource.  Perhaps
there's a model that could mirror that?

Rob
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 14:26:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:38:22 UTC