- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 13:30:46 +0100
- To: SWBPD list <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi here are the WNET TF minutes for the second half of the telecon on
8th July. A bit rough ...
IRC
http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-swbp-irc
(commencing 15:09:56)
Present:
Ralph, Guus, Alistair, DanBri,
Aldo, jeremy, brian, PatH
Actions:
ACTION Jeremy: literal format / 118N issues
ACTION Guus: IDs for word senses pros and cons
ACTION Aldo on Synset URIs in relation to versioning
We worked through some of the issues in
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/wordnet_2.rdf
1) How to ensure that an RDFS processor can process this correctly and
also be sure a DL processor can also process it correctly.
Postponed
2) Use of XML literal rather than xsd:String. Where might we need to
allow XML markup? e.g. glossary entry, lexical form?
I18N have been asked, but no response:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-i18n-ig/2004Jul/0001
Options: XMLLiteral, plain literal, or xsd:string
10) IDs for word senses?
Discussion about whether word senses needed URIs or not.
Summary: URIs are useful but not a drop-dead requirement
11) concatenated names for synsets?
Possible synset URIs like
http://example.com/..../syn_234242_Some_Friendly_Text_here
where _Some_Friendly_Text is a concatenation of word senses
12) synset URIs and versioning?
Synset IDs are not preserved across versions.
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2004 08:31:04 UTC