comment on itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef

[VladimirAlexiev]

In http://vladimiralexiev.github.io/Multisensor/#sec-4 I got this:

<#char=1116,1123> a nif:Word;
  itsrdf:taClassRef nerd:Organization;
  itsrdf:taConfidence 0.9; # means the same as "0.9"^^xsd:decimal
  itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef "text-analysis|http://linguatec.com". !!!!

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

itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef rdfs:comment 
"""URL or URI of the software or person that made the annotation, eg 
<http://some-company.com> or <http://some-company.com/some-software> or 
<http://some-company.com/some-software/v1.23>.

Unlike ITS XML which uses a specially formatted string 
(e.g. "text-analysis|http://some-company.com"),
use a proper URL or URI, so you can attach extra info to it, eg

<http://some-company.com/some-software/v1.23>
  a prov:SoftwareAgent, doap:Version ;
  doap:shortdesc "Some Company's powerful Software" ;
  doap:revision "1.23".

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
"""

(Note: this assumes that NIF uses itsrdf:taAnnotatorsRef and not nif:provenance, as per #15). If not, put this comment on nif:provenance

[neradis]

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)

[VladimirAlexiev]

If nif:oliaLink is not determined by Text Analysis, what then? Black magic?

[neradis]

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?