It wasn't clear if you wanted editorial or substantive comments so what
follows is a little of both. ;-)
Introduction: I am not sure what this was intended to advance.
It seems to be a mixture of odd statements:
> Many of the modules in TEI can be said to have an implicit ontology.
> The same way as
> TEI makes textual features existing in the text explicit, such
> modellin will enable us to make
> implicit conceptual structures explicit.
Off hand I would say all TEI modules have an implicit ontology, although
probably not in the sense you mean here.
> If one wants to do this, a reference to the person will need to be
> included in the data
> connected to the document, typically in the markup. This can be done
> in different ways, as
> will be discussed below.
Sorry, what connection does the "person" have with the conceptual
> In the following, such an approach will be called conceptual
> modelling. There are many
> different reasons for wanting to do this, and many potential end
> results. One project will often
> want to persue several results of this single process.
OK, but isn't that just hand waving?
And just startling conclusions:
> Whatever the use may be, the method will open up for inclusion of TEI
> data in the semantic
> web. Not just the documents as items, but the world information
> described inside them. It
> opens for doing this on different levels of complexity, at different
> stages. The whole process
> can be pretty simple. Or one can make a complex mapping, but still
> export simpler versions
> from the mapping when that is requested. Converting from CIDOC-CRM to
> Dublin Core, for
> instance, is a well defined process. This also will enable mappings to
> future standards to come.
> In sum, this will combine the strengths of TEI and conceptual models
> (ontologies) to a
> very robust and usable package.
Err, assuming what I think is meant is possible, that would come at the
end of a rather lengthy document showing concrete results and not in the
I am not sure what difference is seen between the TEI and "conceptual
models?" It has been a while but if I recall the SGML Handbook
correctly, markup *is* a conceptual model of a text. And any particular
set of markup is only *one* model of that text.
If you mean that the TEI "model" has different terms and concerns than
some other model, well and good but say that. Then say how we can
include that model in a TEI document using the TEI model (or extensions
to it). Or how you want to convert a text modeled using the TEI model
into some other model. But all those are different statements from the
ones in your document.
modellin -> modeling
modelling -> modeling
> A good advice is to think about conceptual models from the outset.
> This should be part of
> the data analysis, in asking why to mark up, leading into what to mark
> up. What is the target
> ontology, what is the purpose of the markup?
Conceptual models should be part of the analysis of a text for the
application of markup.
> If one is to produce a simple list of names, the needs may be
> different than if the result
> should be a thesaurus. The methods may also be different.
This doesn't seem to advance this section but then its purpose is
unclear so I may be wrong about that.
If the point of this section is that if material is not marked it won't
be included in an ontology, just as quotes that are not encoded won't be
reported in markup parsing, why not simply say that? But then isn't that
> There are no principle differences between fiction and non-fiction,
> but the ontologies one
> will want to map to will differ.
Really? I don't object but then my grip on reality is fairly loose. Why
would I have a different ontology for mapping an official US history of
Latin American versus some alternative history, i.e., ones written by
people who are not whoring for United Fruit?
> in fiction of ethnographical texts
??? Sorry? What do you think is "fictional" about ethnographical texts?
availible -> available
One approach to mapping markup structures to other conceptual models can
be found in the original topic maps standard, ISO 13250, which was based
on HyTime. That was before the "popular" version of topic maps was
created using a static XML format.
Or you could look at the way that RDFa was incorporated into ODF
documents in ODF 1.2. Which includes facilities for extrinsic metadata.
BTW, the paper starts off with:
> “start on
> the development of guidelines for how to create TEI documents that
> easily may be mapped
> to ontologies such as the CIDOC-CRM”. This document comprises a draft
> for such a set of
I think the important part that I am missing from this document is how
it meets the requirement to be "guidelines for how to create TEI
documents that easily may be mapped to ontologies such as the
CIDOC-CRM”. That is to say, where are the "guidelines?" Granting it asks
a lot of interesting questions but I don't see any answers or how I
would choose between them.
Apologies but due to other editing activities will only be able to
participate on an irregular basis.
Hope you are at the start of a great week!
Øyvind Eide wrote:
> Dear all,
> I plan to work on this draft on Wednesday morning. Could you please
> send any comments or input you may have by Tuesday afternoon, that is,
> Den 11. nov.. 2009 kl. 20.06 skrev Øyvind Eide:
>> Dear all,
>> Here is a first raw draft of the mapping guidelines, in TEI, HTML
>> and PDF. We try to keep the TEI version as the
>> source.<guidelinesP5.xml> <guidelinesP5.pdf> <guidelinesP5.html>
>> It is full of rubbish and the TEI encoding is simple, to say the
>> least. But it is a start! We have about four weeks to finish it.
>> Thanks to all participants on the workshop for three very exciting
>> Kind regards,
>> Øyvind Eide
>> Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
>> Unit for Digital Documentation, University of Oslo
>> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008
>> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and
>> focus on
>> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
>> Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july_______________________________________________
>> Tei-ontology-sig mailing list
> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
> Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
> Tei-ontology-sig mailing list
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)