Re: {Disarmed} Re: How to put an annotation in HTML?

Thanks.
I guess now I am really getting a bit confused.
The ITS Draft has http://sws.geonames.org/4951788 as an example its-ta-ident-ref
This led me to believe that I could annotate NL fragments in the html document with the URIs of resources such as countries (or rather whatever type that URI has - some sort of feature, I am guessing, but can't seem to find).
And then in the discussion there were things like http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin which again is a URI of a resource that is in the end Wikipedia's idea of what Dublin is.
(The RDF from the URI doesn't seem to give types, but the SPARQL endpoint says it is a dbpedia:ontology/Place among other things.)
But in this message you have moved to using http://wiktionary.dbpedia.org (and lexvo), which I understand to be concerned with URIs for words, as with Wordnet.
Is this switch significant?
So is its-ta-ident-ref restricted to URIs for words?
And if not, since Classes are resources, surely they can be used for its-ta-ident-ref?
And with respect to whether I am mixing levels, the answer is I think "yes".
I want to be able to make annotations at any level.
So I might annotate the word "goose" as the word goose, a URI for the goose I am eating, or an instance of the class of geese.
(And even the property goose, if I could think of such a thing.)

Of course it may cause some processors problems to have such things but should the expressivity be restricted because of that?
(And I guess if there are restrictions it should say so in the ITS document - although I can't find it.)

Thanks again for your patience - I realise that I am probably looking at using ITS well out of its design spec, but it does seem to be useful if I want to do really simple annotation (and consume it).
Best
Hugh 

On 30 Apr 2013, at 13:35, Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:

> Hi Hugh,
> I think you are mixing up a lot of different levels.
> nerd:Location is a class used for data integration of different NLP tools. I  am unsure, why you want to annotate directly with it?
> 
> On a lexical level, I would rather advise you to annotate with one of these URIs:
> http://wiktionary.dbpedia.org/resource/location
> http://wiktionary.dbpedia.org/resource/location-English-Noun-1en
> or
> http://lexvo.org/id/term/eng/location
> or Wordnet .
> 
> For the HTML attribute there are not so strict rules, but when you transition to OWL DL, there will be problems.
> All the best,
> Sebastian
> 
> 
> Am 29.04.2013 12:14, schrieb Hugh Glaser:
>> Hi.
>> On 29 Apr 2013, at 06:14, Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello Hugh,
>>> indeed, what you want goes more into the direction of ontology learning and actually, I would say that your example is arguable.
>>> 
>>> If it were a definition, the kind of annotation you propose would be feasible:
>>> 
>>> The terms <span its-ta-ident-ref="http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Location">location</span> and place in geography are used to notice and or identify a point or an area on the Earth's surface or elsewhere.
>>> 
>>> Actually, what you mean and what is practical and useful is:
>>> <span its-ta-ident-ref="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin" its-ta-class-ref="http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Location">Dublin</span> is a location.
>> Actually, it isn't :-)
>> What I want to say is the equivalent of "I live in some <span its-ta-ident-ref="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Location">location</span>".
>> Your description encodes the knowledge from the NL in the annotation, so is saying much more in annotation than I intended.
>> I simply wanted to provide an unambiguous URI for the word Location.
>> Of course, I would be better saying "I live in some <span its-ta-ident-ref="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Location_(geography)">location</span>".
>> Now what happens if I want to use http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Location instead of http://dbpedia.org/resource/Location_(geography)
>> is the question I was trying to get to?
>> I think that your para starting "The terms…" say that I can do exactly that - thanks.
>>> Although the first case, where you can define an ontology and mark up the references of classes in the text, is nice, it remains rather academic and marginal, while the other one is relevant for web-scale.
>> I don't think I agree (if I understand your correctly) - is the distinction between (possibly singleton) classes and resources really such an important one in this annotation world?
>> Is it any more sensible to ask where a word that is stated to refer the resource http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin appears in a document than a word that is stated to refer the class http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Location ?
>> And even harder I can say there is a word that refers to the resource http://dbpedia.org/resource/Location_(geography) but I can't say that there is a word that refers to the resource http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Location, because it is a class?
>> Best
>>> All the best,
>>> Sebastian
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 28.04.2013 11:48, schrieb Hugh Glaser:
>>>> I'm not sure its-ta-class-ref is what I meant.
>>>> Your example (simplified a little):
>>>> <p><span
>>>>           its-ta-class-ref="http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Location"
>>>>           its-ta-ident-ref="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin">Dublin</span>
>>>>       is the capital of Ireland.</p>
>>>> Sort of thing I meant:
>>>> <p><span its-ta-ident-ref="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Dublin">Dublin</span> is a
>>>>           <span its-ta-ident-ref="http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Location">Location</span>
>>>>      in Ireland.</p>
>>>> 
>>>> I am guessing I would need to do that, rather than use its-ta-class-ref.
>>>> (Assuming you can guess what I think I might be achieving!)
>>>> One says that this is a resource from a class, and the other says that this is a class.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 27 Apr 2013, at 19:13, Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Hugh,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 27.04.2013 18:47, schrieb Hugh Glaser:
>>>>>> Actually, your example <span its-ta-ident-ref="http://usefulinc.com/ns/doap#developer">someone who works on</span> is quite interesting as #developer is an rdf:property. This might actually be problematic later in RDF as it causes OWL Full, when used as an object.
>>>>>> Ah - I think that is why I put it in - to see what happened :-)
>>>>>> I was thinking of putting a Class in as well, but I guess that makes less difference.
>>>>> Classes are tackled with its-ta-class-ref . Named Entity Recognition and Linking (i.e class (Person, etc.) and entity link) are a much more common use case than relation extraction, which is why we included it from the start. This was a given separation done by language tools, any how. Making a distinction between instances, properties (object, datatype), classes and annotations is OWL specific, so the motivation+rationale comes from a different domain.
>>>>> -- Sebastian
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
>>> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
>>> Events: NLP & DBpedia 2013 (http://nlp-dbpedia2013.blogs.aksw.org, Deadline: *July 8th*)
>>> Venha para a Alemanha como PhD: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/csf Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://linguistics.okfn.org , http://dbpedia.org/Wiktionary , http://dbpedia.org
>>> Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
>>> Research Group: http://aksw.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
> Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
> Events: NLP & DBpedia 2013 (http://nlp-dbpedia2013.blogs.aksw.org, Deadline: *July 8th*)
> Venha para a Alemanha como PhD: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/csf
> Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://linguistics.okfn.org , http://dbpedia.org/Wiktionary , http://dbpedia.org
> Homepage: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
> Research Group: http://aksw.org

Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2013 21:46:34 UTC