W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > April 2015

Re: Schema for online dictionary and glossary?

From: Peter Krauss <ppkrauss@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 11:10:33 -0300
Message-ID: <CAHEREtv6c3nBN-1VmhYAoh-zPt7AxwUj6SSa45g2wFFr0UJPsQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: chaals@yandex-team.ru
Cc: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, Anastasia Baryshnikova <asia.baryshnikova@gmail.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Sorry my english, I must say
   "in my opinion... I think that the choose of URN  is possible, but is a
semantic/technological subtlety ..."
... remembering  the context about this kind of choose
<https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/405#issuecomment-88501504>.

Please show here some examples of the "lot of ways..." that you are citing.


2015-04-13 10:59 GMT-03:00 <chaals@yandex-team.ru>:

> 13.04.2015, 12:05, "Peter Krauss" <ppkrauss@gmail.com>:
>
> It is a semantic/technological subtlety... I think this kind of demand is
> better to fix by URNs,
>
>
> to be blunt, I don't think the URN approach is really relevant to
> schema.org. It breaks our approach, in a whole lot of ways...
>
> cheers
>
>
> examples (suppose a "mydic" for "my dictionary URN schema"),
>
>   urn:mydic:en:mum
>   urn:mydic:pt-br:mamãe
>   urn:myterm:en:environment
>   urn:myterm:pt-br:meio.ambiente
>
> the key to work with URNs and SchemaOrg is the URN-Resolver, see
> discussion at
>
>    https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/405#issuecomment-88501504
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> 2015-04-13 5:21 GMT-03:00 Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>:
>
> Anastasia
>
> Indeed schema.org currently lacks terms to describe linguistic /
> knowledge organization resources such as dictionaries. Maybe a future
> extension ...
>
> Meanwhile, you might wish to explore
> http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/vocabs?tag=Vocabularies
> which provides some vocabularies designed to describe language and
> linguistic resources
>
> The first on the list, GOLD (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold) certainly
> provides expressivity beyond your needs.
> Lexvo.org ontology (http://lexvo.org/ontology) is simpler and used in
> lexvo.org terminological data base.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
>
> 2015-04-13 10:01 GMT+02:00 Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 08:57 Anastasia Baryshnikova <
> asia.baryshnikova@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've investigated the issue but I don't seem to be able to find a
> solution. I have an online dictionary where every term is linked to
> abbreviations, definitions and translations in other languages. How do I
> annotate them with microdata?
> The closest thing I can think of is make every term a CreativeWork, with
> inLanguage property. But how do i link 2 terms that are translations of
> each other?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance!
>
>
>
> If you mean schema.org, there is not a lot of vocab for this kind of
> thing yet. But you might read around Wordnet in RDF e.g. starting at
> http://wordnet-rdf.princeton.edu/
>
> Dan
>
>
> Anastasia Baryshnikova
> Crossdictionary.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Bernard Vatant*
> Vocabularies & Data Engineering
> Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
> Skype : bernard.vatant
> http://google.com/+BernardVatant
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Mondeca*
> 35 boulevard de Strasbourg 75010 Paris
> www.mondeca.com
> Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews <http://twitter.com/#%21/mondecanews>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>
>
Received on Monday, 13 April 2015 14:11:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:40 UTC