Re: RE: vocabularies for parliamentary proceedings


Last year I worked with a group lead by the Cornell Legal Information
Institute to build an event-aware model for US legislative materials, under
a grant from the Library of Congress. We're still in the process of
publishing the results, as well as exposing the vocabularies we built
within the Open Metadata Registry. You can get a glimpse of the former in
the blog 'Making Metasausage' ( and
take a look at the vocabulary portion of the work in progress (

We would be happy to entertain questions about the work, and will certainly
pass on links to other published material as it is issued.

Diane Hillmann
Metadata Management Associates

-------- Original Message --------

> Subject: RE: vocabularies for parliamentary proceedings
> Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:26:38 +0000
> Resent-From:
> Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:26:05 +0000
> From: Tarasova, Tatiana <>
> To: Ghislain Atemezing <>
> CC: Pierre Andrews <>, eGov W3C <
>>, "" <>
> Hi Ghislain,
> Yes, I think it is a good idea to have an event-based approach to model
> parliamentary proceedings documents, as each document is indeed an output
> of an event, the Parliamentary meeting.
> I am considering it as a future work. For now, I am focusing on how to
> represent each document. As I already said the previous project,
> PoliticalMashup, did a great job by making implicit structure and semantics
> of the Dutch parliamentary proceedings explicit. Since I have not found any
> specific vocabulary for my needs, I will reuse already identified concepts
> and will translate them into an RDF model.
> Best regards,
> Tatiana
> ______________________________**__________
> From: Ghislain Atemezing []
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 10:25 AM
> To: Tarasova, Tatiana
> Cc: Pierre Andrews; eGov W3C;
> Subject: Re: vocabularies for parliamentary proceedings
> Hi,
> Just my 2cents here...
>> I would like to clarify better what kind of data I aim to describe in
>> RDF. I have proceedings documents which are essentially written notes
>> from the parliamentary meetings. In a nutshell, they are documented
>> speeches of members of the parliament. Since all parliamentary meetings
>> have quite strict structure, the proceedings documents implicitly
>> reflect this structure. For example, each meeting has topics (discussed
>> in the meeting); speeches are held at the meeting; the name of the
>> speaker (member of the parliament) is recorded together with her
>> affiliation; the verbal content of the speeches are held within small
>> paragraphs. There are other structural elements like scenes and stage
>> directions. All these structural elements were already extracted from
>> the proceedings by the PoliticalMashup project [2]. So, what we want to
>> do now is really "the next step": explicitly define semantics of these
>> elements and publish the Dutch proceedings as Linked Data.
>>  What happen if you model meetings as "Events" with the "what", "when",
> "who" views...Let say:
>    -for meetings/event, you could reuse lode onto []
> for defining different type of meetings
>    -for the "what" view reusing the bibo onto has mentioned
>    -for the "when" view with the time onto and any appropriate
>    -The "who" view will be attached to the agent, role and organization
>    -for the scenes, directions, you could reuse the buildings and room
> onto []
>    Other pointer of interest:
>    * The project Documents onto [] at DERI.
> I hope this also helps,
> Best
> Ghislain
> --
> Ghislain Atemezing
> EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
> Campus SophiaTech
> 450, route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France.
> e-mail: &
> Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8178
> Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
> Web:**atemezin <>

Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 14:59:44 UTC