Open VladimirAlexiev opened 8 years ago
We can make suggestions about additions to the ITSRDF
vocab, but please note that we are not actually publishing, hosting or curating it (not sure whether you knew already). But since it's in general a good suggestions for clarifying documentation, I guess Felix would be happy to accept a patch like that.
Both itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef and itsrdf:taConfidence apply to all annotations attached to the same node, including itsrdf:taClassRef, itsrdf:taIdentRef, nif:oliaLink, nif:oliaClass, etc
Not sure whether he would agree with the last sentence thought, since ITSRDF
is (from what I understand) supposed to be an 'as close as possible' RDF representation of the ITS
spec itself, where taAnnotatorsRef would only give provenenace for annotations pertaining to the Text Analysis category as defined in ITS
(which does not deal with lots of the stuff that could be annotated with nif:oliaLink
)
If nif:oliaLink is not determined by Text Analysis, what then? Black magic?
It's maybe just my interpretation, but to me the Text Analysis category as described by ITS
in 8.9 Text Analysis appears rather narrow:
The data category provides three pieces of annotation: confidence, entity type or concept class, entity identifier or concept identifier as specified in the following table.
Further in the referenced table ITS
Text analysis confidence
is commented on with:
The confidence value applies to two pieces of information (see the following rows in this table) [Entity type / concept class, Entity / concept identifier]
(Additions in bracket for resolve the reference by me.)
Most or perhaps all annotations that employ nif:oliaLink
can certainly be seen as text analysis results in a wider sense, but since this issue is about correct usage of itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef
I think that calls for also operating with the understanding of the scope of Text Analysis specified in the ITS
standard and assuming congruent the scope of referenced annotations for taConfidence
and taAnnotatorsRef
.
@kurzum What are your views/interpretations on this? I guess Felix would be the best bet for clarification how usage of itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef
is intended, should I invite them to join the discussion on this issue?
In http://vladimiralexiev.github.io/Multisensor/#sec-4 I got this:
And later: "itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef is not a URL but a specially formatted string (coming from the XML heritage of ITS, see 5.7 ITS Tools Annotation)"
But ITSRDF defines
itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef a owl:ObjectProperty
, so it should be a URL not a "specially formatted string". So my mind is badly twisted, interpreting XML data into RDF in such twisted way.To help people like me, please add a comment eg
(Note: this assumes that NIF uses itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef and not nif:provenance, as per https://github.com/NLP2RDF/ontologies/issues/15). If not, put this comment on nif:provenance