- From: Paul Groth <pgroth@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 21:36:26 +0100
- To: Matteo Casu <mattecasu@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org, semantic-web@w3.org
Received on Monday, 4 February 2013 20:36:54 UTC
Hi Matteo, Something also to look at is the Open Annotation spec [1], which is being produced out of the combination of the Annotation Ontology and Open Annotation Model. It seems like there's a lot of community support around it. Paul [1] http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/ On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Matteo Casu <mattecasu@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > [my apologies for cross posting -- possibly of interest for both > communities] > > does anybody could point me to the major pros and cons in using the > Annotation Ontology [0] [1] vs. the NLP interchange format in the context > of annotating (portions of) literary texts? My impression is that when > someone is using UIMA, the integration of AO with Clerezza-UIMA could give > more comfort wrt NiF. > > [0] http://code.google.com/p/annotation-ontology/ > [1] http://www.annotationframework.org/ > [2] http://nlp2rdf.org/about > >
Received on Monday, 4 February 2013 20:36:54 UTC