|
John,
Thanks, I used the SKOS way.
Why would the maintainers of the RDL do all the
translation work? Who pays for that?
You did not make it
clearer than what I had. If only a fraction (say
20) of the 546 languages listed in ISO 639 (http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php)
would be used for these translations of, say, 50,000 concepts, that would be a
very costly exerccise. Besides you would add some one million IDs to
the whole.
So if I may, using your correction:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject rdf:about="RDS6462148">
<skos:prefLabel xml:lang="en">API 610-BB2
SINGLE STAGE CENTRIFUGAL
PUMP</skos:prefLabel>
<skos:definition
xml:lang="en">A single or two
stage, impeller between bearings, radial split casing, centrifugal pump designed
according to the requirements stated in API 610 for code BB2
pumps.</skos:definition>
......
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
At the French RDL
endpoint:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;RDS6462148">
<skos:altLabel
xml:lang="fr">API 610-BB2 ÉTAPE SIMPLE POMPE
CENTRIFUGE</skos:altLabel>
<skos:definition
xml:lang="fr">Un seul ou deux
étapes, la roue entre paliers, carter fendu radial, pompe centrifuge
conçu selon les exigences énoncées
dans l'API 610 pour le code pompes BB2.</skos:definition>
......
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
and at the Chinese
endpoint:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;RDS6462148">
<skos:altLabel
xml:lang="zh">API610-BB2单级离心泵</skos:altLabel>
<skos:definition xml:lang="zh">轴
承，径向剖分机壳，离
心泵根据API610码BB2泵规
定的要求设计之间的单一或
两个阶段，叶轮。</skos:definition>
......
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
Regards,
Hans
Hans Teijgeler,
Laanweg 28,
1871 BJ Schoorl,
Netherlands
Hans,
I've corrected the illegal XML syntax you had for strings,
too.
/jmc
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;RDS6462148">
<skos:altLabel
xml:lang="fr">API 610-BB2 ÉTAPE SIMPLE POMPE
CENTRIFUGE</skos:altLabel>
<skos:altLabel
xml:lang="zh">API610-BB2单级离心泵</skos:altLabel>
<skos:definition
xml:lang="fr">Un seul ou deux
étapes, la roue entre paliers, carter fendu radial, pompe centrifuge
conçu selon les exigences énoncées
dans l'API 610 pour le code pompes BB2.</skos:definition>
<skos:definition
xml:lang="zh">轴
承，径向剖分机壳，离
心泵根据API610码BB2泵规
定的要求设计之间的单一或
两个阶段，叶轮。</skos:definition> </dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;API 610-BB2 ÉTAPE SIMPLE
POMPE CENTRIFUGE">
<owl:sameAs
rdf:resource="&rdl;RDS6462148"/>
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;API610-BB2单
级离心泵">
<owl:sameAs rdf:resource="&rdl;RDS6462148"/>
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
On 2/2/2014 5:05 AM, Hans Teijgeler wrote:
John,
Why would I use owl:sameAs if I can use the remotely
addressed original ID? I simply add information to that
ID.
So when a Chinese company wants the texts on some
presentation form (screen, document) in Chinese, and I have it in
English, I can produce that Chinese text by fetching it from the Chinese RDL
extension.
We can even store "boilerplate texts", because in ISO
15926 text strings are classes as well.
Regards,
Hans
Hans Teijgeler,
Laanweg 28,
1871 BJ Schoorl,
Netherlands
No sir that's not what I am saying. Please reread
my post, and use owl:sameAs.
On 2/2/2014 4:43 AM, Hans Teijgeler
wrote:
John,
That happens already. You can create an extension
of the RDL in the French language and state:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;RDS6462148">
<skos:altLabel>"API 610-BB2 ÉTAPE SIMPLE
POMPE CENTRIFUGE"@fr</skos:altLabel>
<skos:definition>"Un seul
ou deux étapes, la
roue entre paliers, carter fendu radial, pompe centrifuge conçu selon les
exigences énoncées dans l'API
610 pour le
code pompes BB2."@fr</skos:definition>
........
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
and in
Chinese:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:about="&rdl;RDS6462148">
<skos:altLabel>"API610-BB2单级离心
泵"@zh</skos:altLabel>
<skos:definition>"轴
承，径向剖分机壳，离
心泵根据API610码BB2泵规
定的要求设计之间的单一或
两个阶段，叶轮。"@zh</skos:definition>
........
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
Excuses for any
funny Google translation (if applicable).
Regards,
Hans
Hans Teijgeler,
Laanweg 28,
1871 BJ Schoorl,
Netherlands
Just define separate resources for an identifier
and translated names, each with an owl:sameAs triple directing either person
or tool to the normative resource, named in the author's own language. This
normative definition can contain rdfs:labels and or skos' labels or skos
notation who cares.
If one's tools can't handle owl:sameAs
then yeah, they're a bit primitive. (Fortunately semantic wikis handle
sameAs quite naturally).
My point is that if ontologies or datasets
publish/use identifiers of any sort, but don't publish also resources with
such sameAs triples, its authors risk unfriendly comments for foisting this
task on everyone else. So yeah, this is a best practice for identifiers that
should be in the communique for reuse.
/jmc
On 2/2/2014 1:15 AM, Matthew West
wrote:
Dear
David, Ali, Amanda, and Kingsley,
Since
this arose from considering ISO 15926, and there was at least an implicit
criticism involved, let me just explain what we were expecting to
happen.
We
were not expecting others to use the thing ID in ISO 15926-2 to identify
their internal data in their programs or even databases, although this is,
of course, a choice that is available if it is convenient. We were
expecting a situation in which different systems had pre-existing names
for the different classes, and they were not about to change. One of the
reasons we had support for multiple names was so we could provide a
mapping of these names, minimising what was needed to be done within the
existing systems. So we expected local copies of the RDL to include the
local names of the classes for each system a names for those classes, with
which systems used that name, so that translations could be done. It was
anticipated that the RDL itself would be held in a database, and so a
non-human readable ID would be adequate.
Of
course things change in 10+ years, though we had similar discussions then,
that I note are being had now. In the end you have to decide, nothing is
likely to be right for everything.
Regards
Matthew
West
From:
ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ali SH
Sent: 02 February 2014
00:52
To: Ontology Summit 2014 discussion
Subject: Re:
[ontology-summit] [ReusableContent] Partitioning the
problem
Dear Amanda,
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Amanda Vizedom <amanda.vizedom@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I understand, but I think it is mostly a tooling
problem. The tools do not use the appropriate formal language features.
Humans shouldn't be writing or debugging SPARQL queries with only the
concept ID visible, whether it is opaque or suggestive. Either way,
there is extra lookup (out of the cognitive task space) and a greater
likelihood of error than is really tenable. Unfortunately, that is
mostly the state of the art in open/COTS tools, but the way to fix it
isn't to make the IDs more suggestive (and conducive to error); it's to
make the tools use the human-oriented features of the language when
interfacing with humans. BTW, I specified state of the art in *COTS*
tools, because I've seen a number of proprietary tools, developed for
use within an company only, that don't make this same error. I'm
perpetually frustrated that we don't have the same level of tooling in
the open-source or COTS worlds. But it is not a coincidence that the
companies in question have done well in developing semantic enterprise
or web systems with those ontologies as components. They take their
ontologies, and the processes concerning them, rather
seriously.
Yes. Fully agree here. In the example I cited, the
tooling was just atrocious, and better tools would have addressed the
problem.
I just don't think the solution is to treat the
ontology language as more impoverished than it really is. We know there
is far to go in improving tools, anyway. I'd say that one of the
improvements should be to make tools that use the existing support for
co-existing human-readability and machine-uniqueness.
--
(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•)
.,.,
_________________________________________________________________
Msg
Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe:
mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community
Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community
Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
--
(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
|
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (01)
|