> In what I see as the ideal scenario, each text/database entry would
only
> be annotated with the results
OK.
So what we would need is
(1) a tool for getting authors to indicate which bits of the article
actually are their results, and
(2) a way of representing this in RDF. I suppose we're goi
On a broader brainstorming note, it would be nice to have a way of
specifying that a certain dc:Agent thinks that one is a better
annotation than the other also, with the user deciding to trust
certain Agents to give them useful knowledge, or inversely, to not
trust specific Agents who they fi
On 12/02/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Good point. What I was sort of driving at (and failing) was the context
> > in which the facts are mentioned---are they the aim of the paper,
> > background information, mentioned as results and so forth?
>
> In what I see as the i
> Good point. What I was sort of driving at (and failing) was the context
> in which the facts are mentioned---are they the aim of the paper,
> background information, mentioned as results and so forth?
In what I see as the ideal scenario, each text/database entry would only be
annotated with
