Re: Translations of annotation in SDWWG vocabularies

By the way:

   - DCAT is a nice example of a multilingual vocabulary, see
   http://www.w3.org/ns/dcat.ttl
   - In 2014 Phil wrote a blog about some of the issues that turned up when
   W3C vocabularies were translated to Japanese: More Languages for More
   Vocabularies
   <https://www.w3.org/blog/data/2014/02/15/more-languages-for-more-vocabularies/>.
   It is still an interesting read.

Regards,
Frans

On 31 January 2017 at 14:22, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote:

> Hello Rob,
>
> Thank you. So I could just suggest additions to qb4st.ttl
> <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/qb4st/ontology/qb4st.ttl> by
> means of a pull request, right?
>
> Before I start, there are some things I notice:
>
>    1. Some terms have a placeholder comment "This is defined here pending
>    availability of a canonical definition of spatial concepts - at which point
>    an equivalence will be declared". Does this mean waiting for a description
>    in a vocabulary like the upcoming general spatial ontology? Or for a stable
>    entry in the BP glossary <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#glossary>?
>    Would it be an idea to at least provide a temporary explanation,
>    perhaps with an additional remark about pending canonical definitions?
>    2. In some rdfs:labels each word is capitalized (e.g.
>    "Spatial-Temporal Data Structure Definition"), in others not (e.g. "CRS
>    binding for a component specification or a property"). It looks
>    inconsistent, but perhaps I am missing something.
>    3. I see CRS is taken to have a narrower definition than SRS. Is that
>    generally accepted, or defined somewhere in OGC specifications? I was under
>    the impression that SRS and CRS are often used as synonyms.
>
> By the way, do we know of something like a style guide for rdfs:labels and
> rdfs:comments? For all SDWWG vocabularies it would be good to have
> consistency in things like capitalization and punctuation. That would help
> using annotation in applications for end-users. I just found the Style
> Guidelines for Naming and Labeling Ontologies in the Multilingual Web
> <http://dcevents.dublincore.org/IntConf/dc-2011/paper/download/47/15>,
> which offers some help. One recommendation is to expand abbreviations and
> acronyms. Shall we change text like "CRS" to "Coordinate Reference System
> (CRS)" to do justice to that sensible recommendation?
>
> Greetings,
> Frans
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 31 January 2017 at 06:07, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Hi Frans
>>
>> at this stage I have no comments to process on QB4ST, I have been looking
>> into some specific cases where we need to describe hierarchies (year,month,
>> day) and Country,state,etc - but have pretty much decided these will not be
>> formally part of QB4ST as its "bigger that spatial" - and use an
>> informative example - so as far as I am concerned I'd appreciate a
>> translation, for the labels and comments in QB4ST (not very many!) and use
>> this as a practical review of the wording - i.e. if the English isnt
>> working, happy to iterate quickly to get a better one and do the
>> translation.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 at 00:19 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Rob, Kerry, Krzysztof, Danh, Armin, Simon, Chris,
>>>
>>> This is a message to all editors of vocabularies that are produced as
>>> part of SDWWG work.
>>>
>>> One of the requirements for our output
>>> <https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#MultilingualSupport> is to try to have
>>> multilingual annotation in our vocabularies. In order to make that happen,
>>> I was assigned action-223
>>> <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/223>. The idea is that
>>> once the standard annotations in English are being made available in Dutch
>>> too, national prides will play up and other translations will follow. The
>>> translations will make our vocabularies easier to understand for people
>>> that are not fluent in English and will allow the annotations to be used
>>> directly in non-English user interfaces. The translation process could also
>>> serve as a sanity check for the proposed English annotation, because
>>> understanding is a prerequisite for translation.
>>>
>>> The right moment to work on translations seems to be when the English
>>> annotation are considered stable. Hopefully that will be some time before
>>> the SDWWG finishes, to allow for time to do the translating work.
>>>
>>> As far as I know, we have the following vocabularies:
>>>
>>>    - OWL Time
>>>    - QB4ST
>>>    - SSN (likely to be two separate vocabularies: SOSA and SSN)
>>>
>>> So my question to the vocabulary editors is: can you give an estimate of
>>> when translation work can begin?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Frans
>>>
>>>
>