- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:10:46 +0100
- To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Am 31.01.13 17:04, schrieb Mārcis Pinnis: > Hi Felix, > > Ok, then I misunderstood the minutes. > > Then that means that we are at considering just changing Disambiguation? Well, we separated the discussion into two parts. > I think that this solution should be directed to Christian, whether the proposal will resolve his comment or not?! Sure, but any other opinion might help too, e.g. about at least what guidance we should give if people ask how terminology and a revised disambiguation relate. And that guidance would be related again to both data categories - and would need input from both data category types of "heros". Best, Felix > > Best regards, > Mārcis ;o) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:59 PM > To: Mārcis Pinnis > Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > Subject: Re: Issue-68: RE: Thoughts? > > Hi Mārcis, > > Am 31.01.13 16:52, schrieb Mārcis Pinnis: >> Hi Felix, >> >> I understood that during the call on Wednesday a new idea came up of not having stand-off at all, but merging the two data categories. > Actually, no - the discussion was just about changing "disambiguation". > No discussion about merge. Summary of the change: > - drop the levels > - rename attributes and the data category to "text analysis annotation". > > As said at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/0254.html > > > * Steps needed anyway for resolving issue-67 are: re-writing > the now "tan" section (previously "disambig"), and potentially > rewriting / merging "Terminology". Opinions on these topics or > volunteers, please step up. > > No discussion about whether a merge is still needed. See also the other mails from Yves, Tadej and I here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/0254.html > > HTH, > > Felix > >> This would allow only one type of annotation at a time. This is fine by me, however, then it has to be understood that process workflows with two types of annotation will in general be impossible. Or ... to be more precise, such workflows would simply not make sense as the types are in general meant for different application (consumption) purposes and if the applications differ, existing mark-up may be in the way when trying to produce additional mark-up with a different type. >> >> But ... this is, I believe, where we actually started the discussion - of just merging the data categories. Also, if you remember, you hinted to the fact that Terminology and Disambiguation has no inheritance - that means that there may be an existing issue (or limitation if you like that word better) in the current version, because, for instance: >> <p >> its-tan-class-ref="http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology#Organization">University of <b>London</b></p> also after the changes won't be a correct annotation. >> >> So ... if that limitation (although it is a big limitation IMO) is acceptable to everyone, then we may proceed, however ... there may be objections to that?! >> >> Best regards, >> Mārcis ;o) >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] >> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 5:35 PM >> To: Mārcis Pinnis >> Subject: Thoughts? >> >> Hi Mārcis, >> >> in case you have any further thoughts on >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/ >> 0258.html just let me or the list know - Christian and Tadej very >> likely will provide further input by Monday. >> >> Best, >> >> Felix
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 16:11:15 UTC