W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > December 2019

Re: AW: Expressing relations between targets?

From: Bridget Almas <balmas@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 08:54:23 -0500
To: Simon Rainer <Rainer.Simon@ait.ac.at>, Benjamin Young <byoung@bigbluehat.com>, "public-openannotation@w3.org" <public-openannotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <309a60c9-b67c-2687-69b2-991224adfc59@gmail.com>
Hi Rainer,


Yes, I think that's right.


I too wonder what people think about the body structure :-)


Best,

Bridget

On 12/10/19 2:28 AM, Simon Rainer wrote:
>
> Hi Bridget,
>
>
> interesting. It's certainly a bit of a different approach to my 
> original thoughts, but could be pretty applicable... (And actually it 
> might be closer to what we are doing now internally right now, 
> although in a proprietary way). To summarize how I understand this 
> (and how I'd apply it to my case) - please correct me if I'm wrong: 
> you are essentially creating an annotation that's attached to "one end 
> of the arrow", as it were. And then there's a single body in 
> there, that essentially models the "arrow" (link relation + target).
>
>
> In terms of mechanics, I think that would totally work for us, too. I 
> wonder what people's views are on the body structure, though. I.e. the 
> body being a graph that works like a target :-) In any case: IMO a 
> good pattern.
>
>
> Cheers & thanks,
>
> Rainer
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Von:* Bridget Almas <balmas@gmail.com>
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 9. Dezember 2019 22:45
> *An:* Benjamin Young; public-openannotation@w3.org
> *Betreff:* Re: Expressing relations between targets?
>
> Hi Benjamin,
>
>
> Sure. The use case is not exactly the same as Rainer's but I think it 
> has some similarities.  Note that this was done with the OA data model 
> before it became the W3C model, so it's a little out of date that way 
> as well.
>
>
> But anyway, the following is an annotation which reflects a user 
> annotating a bibliographic entry in a bibliographic dictionary. The 
> target of the annotation is the selection of the name Rhea in the 
> entry for the person entity named Cronus. The body of the annotation 
> is a graph which describes the bond between the resource identified by 
> the text "Rhea" with a Person entity with the uri for the Cronus 
> person entity (http://data.perseus.org/people/smith:cronus-1#this").
>
>
> To be more complete, under this model there would ideally be
>
> (1) an annotation which associated the text entry itself with the 
> person entity identifier for Cronus
>
> (2) an annotation which annotates the "Rhea" text with a uri for the 
> person entity for Rhea,
>
> (3) an annotation whose target is text selector for "He was married to 
> Rhea" and whose body is the graph of the relationship between the Rhea 
> entity and the Cronus entity
>
>
> But we never got that far :-)
>
>
> Best,
>
> Bridget
>
>
>
> {
>   "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/oa-context-20130208.json",
>   "@id": "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1",
>   "annotatedBy": {
>     "@type": "foaf:Group",
>     "@id": "http://data.perseus.org/sosol/users/Andrew",
>     "foaf:member": [
>       {
>         "foaf:name": "Jane Doe",
>         "@type": "foaf:person"
>       }
>     ]
>   },
>   "@type": "oa:Annotation",
>   "dcterms:source": 
> "https://hypothes.is/api/annotations/18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg",
>   "dcterms:title": "http://data.perseus.org/people/smith:cronus-1#this 
> identifies Rhea as object of snap:IntimateRelationship relationship in 
> urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:C.cronus_1",
>   "annotatedAt": "2015-10-07T15:30:27.211185+00:00",
>   "motivatedBy": "oa:identifying",
>   "serializedBy": {
>     "@id": "https://hypothes.is",
>     "@type": "prov:SoftwareAgent"
>   },
>   "hasTarget": {
>     "@id": "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1#target-1",
>     "@type": "oa:SpecificResource",
>     "hasSelector": {
>       "@id": 
> "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1#target-1-sel-1",
>       "@type": "oa:TextQuoteSelector",
>       "exact": "Rhea",
>       "prefix": "g the Titans. He was married to ",
>       "suffix": ",\n                  by whom he b"
>     },
>     "hasSource": {
>       "@id": "urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:C.cronus_1"
>     }
>   },
>   "hasBody": {
>     "@context": {
>       "snap": "http://onto.snapdrgn.net/snap#",
>     },
>     "@graph": [
>       {
>         "@id": 
> "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1#rel-target",
>         "@type": "http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#SpecificResource",
> "http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#hasSelector": {
>           "@id": 
> "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1#target-1-sel-1",
>           "@type": "http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#TextQuoteSelector",
> "http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#exact": "Rhea",
> "http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#prefix": "g the Titans. He was married to ",
> "http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#suffix": ",\n                  by whom he b"
>         },
>         "hasSource": {
>           "@id": 
> "urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:C.cronus_1"
>         }
>       },
>       {
>         "@id": "http://data.perseus.org/people/smith:cronus-1#this",
> "snap:has-bond": [
> "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1#bond-1-1"
>         ]
>       },
>       {
>         "@id": 
> "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1#bond-1-1",
>         "@type": "snap:IntimateRelationship",
> "snap:bond-with": {
>           "@id": 
> "urn:cite:perseus:pdljann.18IJy7d0QG2ztppbX3CCeg.1.1#rel-target"
>         }
>       }
>     ]
>   }
> }
>
> On 12/9/19 3:54 PM, Benjamin Young wrote:
>> Hey Bridget,
>>
>> I'd love to see an example of how y'all structured that 
>> annotation...legal or not. ;)
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Benjamin
>>
>> --
>>
>> http://bigbluehat.com/
>>
>> http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Bridget Almas <balmas@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Monday, December 9, 2019 1:09 PM
>> *To:* public-openannotation@w3.org <public-openannotation@w3.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: Expressing relations between targets?
>>
>> To add to this -- in Perseids (first with Hypothes.is and then with 
>> Plokamos) we did something similar, setting the annotation body to a 
>> graph that encoded the relationship using the SNAP ontology.  It 
>> wasn't perfect, particularly because we embedded the graph directly 
>> in the annotation body rather than referencing it via URI, which 
>> wasn't really legal, but it did allow us to express the nature of the 
>> relationship.  Happy to provide more details if you're interested.
>>
>>
>> Bridget
>>
>>
>> On 12/9/19 12:14 PM, Benjamin Young wrote:
>>> Thanks for writing, Simon!
>>>
>>> At this point, I'd suggest being careful not to reinvent RDF inside 
>>> Web Annotation. Something like "A is the father of B" or similar is 
>>> already better expressed via much simpler RDF (assuming you have 
>>> identifiers for the things. Mixing that into the annotation model 
>>> starts to create all kinds of painful indirection. 😕
>>>
>>> That said, I'm noting a lack of "directionality" when targeting 
>>> resources in Web Annotation. I'm not (yet) certain it's Web 
>>> Annotation's job to record that, just noting that it currently isn't 
>>> possible. Appendix D has the things that get close: 
>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#sets-of-bodies-and-targets 
>>> But even so, I don't think there's a way to turn "Orestes killed 
>>> Aegisthus" into an annotation per se.
>>>
>>> It might be best to narrow in on the "textual editing part" and 
>>> explore potential needs in that context. Otherwise, RDF proper would 
>>> likely do a much cleaner job of expressing the things you note below.
>>>
>>> Happy to discuss further!
>>> Benjamin
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> http://bigbluehat.com/
>>>
>>> http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *From:* Simon Rainer <Rainer.Simon@ait.ac.at> 
>>> <mailto:Rainer.Simon@ait.ac.at>
>>> *Sent:* Monday, December 9, 2019 8:28 AM
>>> *To:* James Smith <jgsmith@gmail.com> <mailto:jgsmith@gmail.com>
>>> *Cc:* public-openannotation@w3.org 
>>> <mailto:public-openannotation@w3.org> <public-openannotation@w3.org> 
>>> <mailto:public-openannotation@w3.org>
>>> *Subject:* AW: Expressing relations between targets?
>>>
>>> Hi James,
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree - we'd ideally want to identify the people via URIs. And 
>>> then the assertion "is father of" would be a statement between those 
>>> two entities.
>>>
>>>
>>> However, within the annotation environment, the scenario is that 
>>> this would be like a note, made a human editor, on the text. So I'm 
>>> inclined to say that, we are indeed talking about a statement about 
>>> two strings of text - at least at this point in the workflow.
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess the example is also not ideal here. The annotations might 
>>> just as well be highlighting two different text paragraphs, and the 
>>> annotator would drag an arrow between them saying "the author is 
>>> repeating him/herself here", or whatever. I.e. irrespective of what 
>>> ever "real world meaning" might be behind the arrow eventually, I'm 
>>> primarily interested in using WebAnno/Open Annotation to model the 
>>> textual editing part.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Rainer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *Von:* James Smith <jgsmith@gmail.com> <mailto:jgsmith@gmail.com>
>>> *Gesendet:* Montag, 9. Dezember 2019 14:18
>>> *An:* Simon Rainer
>>> *Cc:* public-openannotation@w3.org <mailto:public-openannotation@w3.org>
>>> *Betreff:* Re: Expressing relations between targets?
>>> How do we know who the text "Aegisthus" refers to? It's a name, so 
>>> it's identifying something, but who/what is the identity we 
>>> associate with the string "Aegisthus"?
>>>
>>> While we might all agree on whom we link the text to in our minds, 
>>> it might be helpful to add some context for the computer. I'd add 
>>> another property on the body that points to a dbpedia entry or other 
>>> unique URI that is useful in asserting the identity of the person 
>>> referenced in the text as "Aegisthus". Let's say it's 
>>> <dbpedia:Aegisthus>. The same could be done for "Orestes" with a 
>>> link (for the purposes of discussion) of <dbpedia:Orestes>.
>>>
>>> Once this is done, then it's a matter of asserting the 
>>> <dbpedia:Aegisthus> is related to <dbpedia:Orestes>. It's not about 
>>> the string "Aegisthus" having a familial relationship with the 
>>> string "Orestes", or that one annotation has a familial relationship 
>>> with another annotation, but about the person <dbpedia:Aegisthus> 
>>> having such a relationship with the person <dbpedia:Orestes>. They 
>>> just happen to be referenced as "Aegisthus" and "Orestes" in this 
>>> particular text.
>>>
>>> If we did make the relationship about the strings in the text, then 
>>> that relationship wouldn't be true for any other instances of the 
>>> strings "Aegisthus" and "Orestes" in this or any other text. It 
>>> would be about the two instances already highlighted.
>>>
>>> -- Jim
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 8:03 AM Simon Rainer <Rainer.Simon@ait.ac.at 
>>> <mailto:Rainer.Simon@ait.ac.at>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Dear list,
>>>
>>>
>>>     I have a question regarding the possible use of the WebAnno
>>>     model for expressing a relationship between two targets.
>>>
>>>
>>>     My scenario is the following:
>>>
>>>
>>>     *) I have two text annotations that identify people. Each
>>>     annotation has a single target (the person name in
>>>     a TextQuoteSelector, and character offset in a
>>>     TextPositionSelector); and a single body (with purpose
>>>     "identifying").
>>>
>>>     *) I now want to create a third annotation that expresses a
>>>     relation between person A and B. (E.g. "A is the father of B" or
>>>     similar.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     My approach would be to model this third annotation like the
>>>     sample below. I.e. with:
>>>
>>>
>>>     *) two targets, each holding the ID of one person annotation
>>>
>>>     *) a body with the relation tag ("is the father of")
>>>
>>>     *) a motivation of "linking"
>>>
>>>
>>>     According to the definition for "linking", that's not correct
>>>     though. "Linking" is supposed to express a link between body and
>>>     all targets, rather than a link between the targets. In
>>>     addition, there's also no way to express directionality.
>>>
>>>
>>>     Does anyone have recommendations on how to tackle such a use
>>>     case with WebAnno? I realize that (some of) this may actually be
>>>     out of scope for the spec as such. In this case, I'd appreciate
>>>     any thoughts, opinions, and possible recommendations on a custom
>>>     extension pattern, if needed.
>>>
>>>
>>>     Cheers & thanks in advance,
>>>
>>>     Rainer
>>>
>>>
>>>     ---
>>>
>>>
>>>     {
>>>       "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/anno.jsonld",
>>>     "id": "#9ba844a7-e8ec-4127-ad12-1f7f16a240c6",
>>>     "type": "Annotation",
>>>     "motivation": "linking",
>>>     "body": [{
>>>       "type": "TextualBody",
>>>       "value": "isRelatedTo"
>>>       }],
>>>       "target": [{
>>>         "id": "#ce0ed291-766b-4763-8e91-90ce1d04e706"
>>>       }, {
>>>         "id": "#447d4bea-08dc-4bd0-ae51-31f5ed7a95a0"
>>>       }]
>>>     }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2019 13:54:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:38:32 UTC