Subject: Re: [IFETS-DISCUSS] Knowledge and annotations #2
From: Michael Verhaart (mverhaart@EIT.AC.NZ)
Date: Thu 29 May 2003 - 13:32:43 MEST
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 23:32:43 +1200 From: Michael Verhaart <mverhaart@EIT.AC.NZ> Subject: Re: [IFETS-DISCUSS] Knowledge and annotations #2
Dawn proposed that in a knowledge base an annotation should be "graded" by the person adding it, to enable viewers to place a value judgement on its quality and validity.
She suggested adding a "source" field as meta data with values;
*Based on a reference (this would be cited)
*Personal opinion
*Observed event
*Experimental outcome.
If I were to add this as meta-data to a sniplet annotation, what other values should I include?
I have called it source, but this doesn't really convey what it is - are there any other suggestions?
Adding this would certainly allow some clear analysis of the annotations.
Michael Verhaart
(List moderator)
CAUTION: This e-mail message and accompanying data may contain information that
is confidential and subject to legal privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient,you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying
of this message or data is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please notify help@eit.ac.nz immediately and delete all material pertaining to
this e-mail. Thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discussion@computer.org
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu 29 May 2003 - 13:37:39 MEST