[open-linguistics] Linguistic Annotation Framework

[Nancy Ide]

Christain,

Thanks for the words of support for LAF! We do have the open source API in Sourceforge.

Your understanding concerning the fee for the ISO document is correct, and I like the idea of an "Open LAF" manual. In fact, as an ISO standard, the LAF document only gives the actual specification but does not provide much in the way of examples or extensive explanation, so an open document would be probably more useful in the end. 


On Aug 9, 2012, at 12:19 AM, Christian Chiarcos wrote:

>> I'd be inclined to study this for possible adoption, but it's hard for me to believe that a non-open standard will be widely adopted.
> 
> This is certainly true, but over the past decade, working on these
> specifications has brought many people from the academic NLP community
> together, and shaped the discussion about corpus representation
> formalisms, and a number of offspring formats and alternative
> instantiations are available. The development of LAF itself is well
> documented in the literature and schemata and an API should be available,
> so that the actual *document* may not be necessary to adopt the standard
> as is.
> 
> I am actually wondering whether it would be possible to develop something
> like an OpenLAF documentation as alternative to the official
> documentation. I mean, SQL is an ISO standard as well, but I know plenty
> more or less professional SQL manuals available for which I doubt that
> license fees have been paid to anyone. @Nancy: Do I understand correctly
> that the fee is only for the original document, not for its
> application/implementation ?
> 
> Best,
> Christian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> open-linguistics mailing list
> open-linguistics at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-linguistics