- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:01:13 +0100
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- CC: Alistair Miles <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk>, Jon Phipps <jphipps@madcreek.com>, Daniel Rubin <dlrubin@stanford.edu>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Sorry I forgot two things > >> >> 1.2. (*) Please provide below some extracts from the vocabulary(ies). >> Use the layout or presentation format that you would normally provide >> for the users of the vocabulary(ies). Please ensure that the extracts >> you provide illustrate all of the features of the vocabulary(ies). >> >> 1.3. Describe the structure of the vocabulary(ies). What are the main >> building blocks? What types of relationship are used? If you can, >> provide examples by referring to the extracts given above. > > > Seems to me that we could switch 1.2 and 1.3 > To answer Daniel's concerns about requirements, we might try to be > more precise here by mentioning the following points (adapted from a > study that a Dutch cultural heritage insitute organized recently for > vocabularies, which btw generally contains elements that validate > Alistair's proposal) > - main building blocks: type of descriptive concepts (terms, > classification items with codes, etc.), presence of non-descriptive > items (qualifiers use to precise the meaning of primitive concepts) > - structure (what type of relationship): hierarchical (with special > interpretation)? associative? management of homonymy/synonymy? Others? > - organization: are the vocabulary elements gathered according to > certain characteristics (facets)? - language: in which language does the vocabulary come in? Is there a primary language? How complete is are translations? >> Section 3. Application > > > <snip> > >> 3.5. Briefly desribe any non-trivial algorithms involved in the >> processing of user actions, e.g. query expansion algorithms. > > > I would prefer "strategies" (simpler,perhaps catching more cases) over > "algorithms". We could perhaps also limit the scope of this question > to vocabulary-related functionalities I wonder how "non-tirivial" the strategies mentioned here could be. Even the use or not of simple hierarchical reasoning could be a nice information to know about. Antoine
Received on Thursday, 23 November 2006 10:01:24 UTC