W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > February 2006

[PORT] Updated French translation of SKOS Core (was Re: Concept vs Resource in SKOS annotations)

From: Alistair Miles <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 11:32:53 +0000
Message-ID: <440434E5.4080807@rl.ac.uk>
To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, SW Best Practices <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

Hi all,

The French translation of the SKOS Core comments, definitions and labels has been updated by Bernard 
Vatant, and the current version is available from:

[1] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core_fr

Bernard's message below describes the changes.

Bernard: I agree with your remarks below, and we'll find a way to include your editorial note in the 
next working draft edition of the SKOS Core Vocabulary Specification. Thanks again for your careful 
and attentive work.

Note that the French variant of the current Working Draft edition of the SKOS Core Vocabulary 
Specification [2] is now out of synch with [1], and will be until the next Working Draft publication.



[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-spec-20051102/fr

Bernard Vatant wrote:
> Following Alistair's recent messages about translations, I'm reviewing 
> the French translation, to fit the latest version of english annotations.
> I just figured that all definitions of properties such as 
> skos:prefLabel, skos:altLabel ... use 'resource', so they implicitly 
> assume that those properties have an open domain, and can be used for 
> any resource, whereas comments add rules for specific use with 
> skos:Concept.  This is great, but quite subtle, though, and maybe this 
> should be explained somewhere explicitly. Remember that SKOS target 
> users are not necessarily RDF formatted to the point to read 
> automatically 'RDF resource' when they read 'resource'... just Googled 
> 'resource' to figure : RDF comes at rank 11, which means the first on 
> the second result page, between the World Resource Institute and the 
> Vegetarian Resource Group :))
> OTOH in the current French translation, I had translated in all those 
> definitions 'resource' by 'concept', which is indeed restrictive vs the 
> english. Wonder now if I made it deliberately wrong, or if at the time 
> this translation was issued, the definitions actually used 'concept' 
> instead of 'resource' ?
> In any case, I will use in the new version the French 'ressource' as 
> translation of 'resource', but since it maybe even less obvious to 
> French-speaking readers than to English-speaking ones that 'ressource' 
> is in this context the R in RDF, I propose to put an explicit editorial 
> note about it.
> Bernard
> -- 
> *Bernard Vatant*
> Knowledge Engineering
> * Mondeca **
> *3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France
> Tel. +33 (0) 871 488 459 
> Mail: bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
> Web: www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com>
> Blog : universimmedia.blogspot.com <http://universimmedia.blogspot.com>

Alistair Miles
Research Associate
CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Building R1 Room 1.60
Fermi Avenue
Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
United Kingdom
Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2006 13:44:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:17 UTC