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

AW: Annotation body a transcription of the target

From: Simon Rainer <Rainer.Simon@ait.ac.at>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 05:32:20 +0000
To: Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>, public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2D09B038956DDF42A3672CB8CB406A5C1D3077D2@S0MSMAIL111.arc.local>
Hi Sebastian,

yes, I'd say my options are either 1 or 2. We simply use "pelagios:Toponym" to denote a transcribed place, so option 3 is redundant. (That probably wasn't clear from my last E-Mail...) And Option 4 doesn't happen, since if we have no transcription, we just omit the textual body altogether.


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Sebastian Hellmann [mailto:hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de] 
Gesendet: Freitag, 11. Oktober 2013 07:10
An: Simon Rainer; public-openannotation
Betreff: Re: Annotation body a transcription of the target

Dear Simon,
a clarification question. So your options are:

hasBody [ chars: "Placename"; rdf:type: "pelagios:Toponym" ] .

hasTranscription [ chars: "Placename"; rdf:type: "pelagios:Toponym" ] .
hasTranscription rdfs:subPropertyOf hasBody .

hasBody [ chars: "Placename"; rdf:type: "pelagios:Toponym" ; rdf:type "TranscribedPlace" ] .

4. (no transcription)
hasBody [ rdf:type: "pelagios:Toponym" ] .

Structure-wise these are very similar and I can see no advantage or disadvantage. I think it is a matter of convention.
Is there a best practice?

All the best,

Am 10.10.2013 21:36, schrieb Simon Rainer:
> Hi,
> as some of you know, the Pelagios project is concerned with annotating place references in different types of documents. Our normal case is that we have one annotation body that is simply a URI representing the place.
> In some cases, however, we also want to attach an actual transcription of the place name as found in the document. To keep annotations coherent (cases without transcription vs. cases with transcription) I'd like to add the transcription as a separate, second body (which should be fine, I guess?).
> Now a quick question/sanity check for the list: I want to explicitely indicate that the textual body is a transcription of a placename. Is the best way to do this to type the body? (The spec only speaks of using typing in terms of media types.) I.e. something like:
> hasBody: [ chars: "Placename"; rdf:type: "pelagios:Toponym" ]
> or should we having our own sub-property of hasBody instead?
> Cheers,
> Rainer

Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
* NLP & DBpedia 2013 (http://nlp-dbpedia2013.blogs.aksw.org)
Venha para a Alemanha como PhD: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/csf
Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://linguistics.okfn.org , http://dbpedia.org/Wiktionary , http://dbpedia.org
Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
Research Group: http://aksw.org
Received on Friday, 11 October 2013 05:32:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:38:24 UTC