- From: Jean-Marc Vanel <jmvanel@free.fr>
- Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 22:18:29 +0100
- To: Greg FitzPatrick <gf@medianet.org>
- Cc: Jeff Sussna <jeff.sussna@quokka.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org, Jean Marc VANEL <jean-marc_vanel@effix.fr>
- Message-ID: <38C81524.595FD021@free.fr>
Here is what I found at : http://www.francophonie.hachette-livre.fr/ locuteur, trice n. LING Sujet parlant. -- Personne qui parle (par oppos. à auditeur ). -- Locuteur de l'espéranto: personne qui parle l'espéranto. a definition that I translate this way: locutor n. LING Speaking Subject. -- Person who speaks (as opposed to auditor ). -- example: Locutor of espéranto: a person speaking espéranto. I apologize because it doesn't seem to exist in english (although it is of latin origin), at least on : http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict http://vancouver-webpages.com/wordnet/ I also tried (also inexistant): enonciator Someone in this wrote "model origin". But it is likely that you application could merge several models, so each statement has an origin. So why not "statement origin" ? Greg FitzPatrick a écrit : > Might I ask the origin of the word "locuter"? > > Greg > > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > > Från: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org > > [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]För Jeff Sussna > > Skickat: den 7 mars 2000 20:48 > > Till: 'Jean-Marc Vanel'; www-rdf-interest@w3.org; Jean Marc VANEL > > Ämne: RE: API for RDF: locutor > > > > A very interesting point. I think you have identified another in a whole > > universe of issues RDF doesn't explicitly address, A whole universe! A would not be so pessimistic! > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jean-Marc Vanel [mailto:jmvanel@free.fr] > > Sent: Monday, March 06, 2000 11:43 PM > > To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org; Jean Marc VANEL > > Subject: API for RDF: locutor > > > > > > David Megginson <david@megginson.com> write on 2000-02-25 : > > > > Unfortunately, it's not about triples. The only way to discover the > > true RDF data model is to reverse-engineer it from the XML, and it > > turns out that there are at least six components (not three) in each > > statement: > > > > subject > > subjectType (global id, local id, URI pattern) > > predicate > > object > > objectType (literal text, literal XML markup, reference) > > objectLang > > > > > > These are not simply syntactic artifacts -- it's information that > > *must* be exposed through any RDF API ... > > > > There's yet another very important item that is implicit in any RDF set of > > descriptions: it's the locutor. .................... > > The obvious design solution is that the locutor IS the URL (not URI here!) > > where our RDF > > set of descriptions appears in. > > > > So if a Web site S1 says about someone: > > > > > > <looks>ugly</looks> > > > > > > And another Web site S2 says about the same person: > > > > > > <looks>handsome</looks> > > > > > > My RDF application can decide, with a knowledge of which of > > locutors S1 and > > S2 is trusted most. -- <person> <firstName>Jean-Marc</firstName> <lastName>Vanel</LastName> <project>Worlwide Botanical Knowledge Base - making botany available on Internet <a href="http://wwbota.free.fr/" >site</a> </project> <a href="http://jmvanel.free.fr/>home page</a> <a href="mailto:jmvanel@free.fr">mail (eventually put "wwbota" in subject to route your mail in relevant folder)</a> </person>
Received on Thursday, 9 March 2000 17:09:51 UTC