Re: Question on expressing translations of terms

> 
> Not sure what would be the next step though. I would at least prefer having a note somewhere saying explicitly that schema:sameAs shouldn't be used for such scenarios (maybe in [1]?).
> 
> What wording would you suggest? My preference would be for the definition of sameAs to be sufficiently clear but we can always link to more details.

You're right, having something within the schema:sameAs definition is better as that's where most people will be looking at.

That being said, people will still try to find a kinda owl:sameAs (but with looser semantics) within schema.org. If schema.org doesn't want to provide first-class support in the ontology, we should at least document an "encoding" of the solution (e.g. using schema:LinkRole if that does the trick), or recommend to look elsewhere (e.g. using owl:sameAs).

I do not know about wording though as it really depends on which solution we want. Maybe we can discuss that at TPAC?

Best,
Alexandre


> 
> Dan
>  
> 
> Best,
> Alexandre
> 
> [1] https://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html#mainEntityBackground
> 
> 
> > On Sep 5, 2016, at 9:47 AM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alexandre and all,
> >
> > coming back to this old thread … I am working on an implementation generating schema.org markup from term data bases - still with the goal to represent the „translated_as“ relation between terms. The google validation tool gives me for the below input
> >
> > {
> >   "@context": "http://schema.org/",
> >   "@id": "http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-1",
> >   "type" : "schema:Thing",
> >  "schema:inLanguage": "ja",
> >  "schema:name": "ページ",
> >  "schema:sameAs": {
> >    "@id": "http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-2",
> >    "type" : "schema:Thing",
> >    "schema:inLanguage": "en",
> >    "schema:name": "page"
> >  } }
> >
> > The attached error messages. How could I adapt the example? Or is this an issue with the tool?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Felix
> >
> > <validation-errors.pdf>
> >
> >
> >> Am 17.03.2016 um 15:35 schrieb Alexandre Bertails <bertails@apple.com>:
> >>
> >> Felix,
> >>
> >> We are currently trying to solve a very similar problem. My plan is to use schema:sameAs for that. Applied to your example:
> >>
> >> {
> >>  "@id": "http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-1",
> >>  "@type": "schema:Term",
> >>  "schema:inLanguage": "en",
> >>  "schema:name": "screwdriver",
> >>  "schema:sameAs": {
> >>    "@id": "http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-2",
> >>    "schema:inLanguage": "de",
> >>    "schema:name": "schraubendreher"
> >>  }
> >> }
> >>
> >> Conceptually, the 2 entities really denote the same thing. Granted, our usage of schema:sameAs is not exactly what's described in https://schema.org/sameAs but there are reasons why we prefer to stay within the schema.org realm. And owl:sameAs would bring a lot of baggage with it which we are not interested in.
> >>
> >> Also, I think schema:translation would be too specific. Personally, I would be happy if the definition of schema:sameAs was less about web pages.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Alexandre
> >>
> >>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 6:22 AM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Am 17.03.2016 um 13:56 schrieb Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>:
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't think the original question was about translating the terms of schema.org itself (classes and properties); it was about the possibility to describe terms/words, similar to what SKOS-XL proposes.
> >>>> For me the original proposition makes sense, it would allow to state things like "this term/word A is used for a large public", "that other word/term B is used by the scientific community" "the words/terms A and B are both used to refer to concept C", "word/term A is an acronym of word/term B", "word/term D is slang, while word/term E is formal language", etc.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, that was the original question. A further comment below.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thomas
> >>>>
> >>>> 2016-03-17 13:38 GMT+01:00 Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>:
> >>>> Yes, I tend to agree with Chaals & Richard here: for translated labels
> >>>> of structured data vocabulary terms (schema.org's and others), we
> >>>> should look towards the underlying W3C standards: RDF/S and perhaps
> >>>> sometimes SKOS, SKOS-XL. It is usual to stick to a single URL for
> >>>> types and properties rather than proliferate them by having different
> >>>> URLs for each language.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> In my use case (see below) I need to differentiate uniquely (= via URIS) between
> >>>
> >>> 1) terms in language X,Y,Z
> >>> 2) common = language agnostic concepts that they denote
> >>> 3) domains (= topics) that they belong too
> >>>
> >>> Richard wrote :
> >>>
> >>> [
> >>> As to proposing a general purpose term definition / relationship structure such as you describe, I can see the need for such a capability but wonder if in most cases SKOS-like existing solutions would suffice for detailed description.  Whereas I would require some convincing as to the potential take up in a broad general purpose vocabulary such as Schema.org.
> >>> ]
> >>>
> >>> The use case is a Japanese buyer of items who knows how something is expressed in his language. He wants to be able to make a search for
> >>> スクリュードライバー
> >>> and say: give me pages about screwdrivers that express the concept of a screwdriver in my domain and denotes the concept I want to buy (= take up the information provided by 1,2,3 above). The buyer does not want to buy screwdrivers in general, and he does not want to buy everything with the label screwdriver in english; but he wants to be a specific screwdriver in a given domain, e.g. automative manufacturing. The buyer also wants to take variants of how terms are expressed into account, e.g. differences in spelling, abbreviations etc.
> >>>
> >>> Such searches are quite common in search of multilingual terminology data bases. In these data bases terms are uniquely identified first class citizens. More and more companies put such data bases on the web but don’t have a way yet to do that with structured HTML markup. So search for multilingual terminology, taking 1,2,3 into account, is not yet possible on the Web.
> >>>
> >>> - Felix
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Here is an example btw of RDFa+RDFS definitions that do this, from
> >>>> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/blob/sdo-deimos/data/l10n/zh-cn/schema_org_zhcn.html
> >>>>
> >>>> <div typeof="rdfs:Class" resource="http://schema.org/Audience">
> >>>> <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">Audience</span>
> >>>> <span class="h" property="rdfs:label" xml:lang="zh-cn">听众</span>
> >>>> <span property="rdfs:comment">Intended audience for an item, i.e. the
> >>>> group for whom the item was created.</span>
> >>>> <span property="rdfs:comment" xml:lang="zh-cn">听众，观众, 读者</span>
> >>>> <span>Subclass of: <a property="rdfs:subClassOf"
> >>>> href="http://schema.org/Intangible">Intangible</a></span>
> >>>> </div>
> >>>>
> >>>> Does this approach do what you have in mind, Felix?
> >>>>
> >>>> Dan
> >>>>
> >>>> On 17 March 2016 at 10:56, Richard Wallis
> >>>> <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Not sure I understand your definition of a term, but the ability to handle
> >>>>> names, or any other text based properties, of things in multiple languages
> >>>>> is already possible:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> {
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  "@context": “http://schema.org/”,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  "@id": "http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-1",
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  "@type": "schema:Thing",
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  "schema:name": [
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    {
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      "@language": "en",
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      "@value": "screwdriver"
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    },
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    {
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      "@language": "de",
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      "@value": "schraubendreher"
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    }
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  ]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> }
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> or in RDFa:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <div typeof="schema:Thing"
> >>>>> about="http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-1">
> >>>>>    <div property="schema:name" xml:lang="en" content="screwdriver"></div>
> >>>>>    <div property="schema:name" xml:lang="de"
> >>>>> content="schraubendreher"></div>
> >>>>>  </div>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ~Richard
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Richard Wallis
> >>>>> Founder, Data Liberate
> >>>>> http://dataliberate.com
> >>>>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
> >>>>> Twitter: @rjw
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 17 March 2016 at 09:04, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It seems that schema.org as of writing would not allow to express the
> >>>>>> relation for terms „A is a translation from B“ or „A is an abbreviation from
> >>>>>> B“. It is already possible to express that A is translation of B, see
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://bib.schema.org/translationOfWork
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> but this is specific to works, not translated terms. Would the below make
> >>>>>> sense? It is adapted from
> >>>>>> https://schema.org/translator
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> note: schema:Term and schema:translation do not exist in schema.org, I
> >>>>>> made them up for the example.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> {
> >>>>>>  "@id": "http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-1",
> >>>>>>  "@type": "schema:Term",
> >>>>>>  "schema:inLanguage": "en",
> >>>>>>  "schema:name": "screwdriver",
> >>>>>>  "schema:translation": {
> >>>>>>    "@id": "http://example.com/my-term-data-base-entry-2",
> >>>>>>    "schema:inLanguage": "de",
> >>>>>>    "schema:name": "schraubendreher"
> >>>>>>  }
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Felix
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> Thomas Francart - SPARNA
> >>>> Web de données | Architecture de l'information | Accès aux connaissances
> >>>> blog : blog.sparna.fr, site : sparna.fr, linkedin : fr.linkedin.com/in/thomasfrancart
> >>>> tel :  +33 (0)6.71.11.25.97, skype : francartthomas
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
>

Received on Monday, 5 September 2016 18:08:24 UTC