Yves Marcoux - OLST-RALI - 21 mars 20071 Une approche basée sur la langue naturelle pour la modélisation de documents structurés Yves MARCOUX GRDS – EBSI

Yves Marcoux - OLST-RALI - 21 mars 2007 1

Une approche basée sur la langue naturelle pour la modélisation de

documents structurés

Yves MARCOUXGRDS – EBSI

Université de Montréal


A natural-language approach to modeling

Why is some XML so difficult to write?

<http://www.idealliance.org/papers/extreme/proceedings/html/2006/Marcoux01/EML2006Marcoux01.html>

http://www.idealliance.org/papers/extreme/proceedings/html/2006/Marcoux01/EML2006Marcoux01.html


Structure of the talk

1. The problem

2. Proposed direction for solution

3. Conclusion

4. Question period


Writing well-formed XML: author’s choices

• <sex><male /></sex>• <is-female>FALSE</is-female>• <gender gender="♂" />• <note>It's a boy!</note>

♂ = ♂


Writing valid XML is collaborative work

• Modeler has chosen the markup (container)

• Author supplies the contents

• Much like a form

• Collaborative work communication between parties: modeler and author

• But the modeler is gone…


Problem

• Authoring environments are:– good at conveying the syntactic intentions (or

decisions) of the modeler– not as good at conveying the semantic

intentions of the modeler

• Often, all there is is a generic ID or some slightly more developed form– Ex.: “date” in a memo


What is available?

• More or less developed forms of genIDs (and attribute names)

• General documentation of the model

• Per element (attribute) documentation

• OK for tooltips or popups

• Could we do better?

• (Applications / stylesheets are not appropriate)


Could we aim at…

• Having a semantic conversation right in the editing window?

• In the same way that there is actually a syntactic conversation?

• Yes…



1. The problem


3. Conclusion

4. Question period


Key idea

• Have modeler prepare bits of NL (prose)

• That can be intertwined with author-supplied contents to give them meaning

• Allows “fill-in”-like sentences

• And thus, a semantic conversation in the editing window

• NB: modeler segments can contain hyperlinks


Example

Facts about some US cities

City PopulationAnnual snowfall (inches)

Denver 850,000 23

Rochester 240,000 88

Palm Spring 48,000 0


Raw XML

<facts-about-US-cities> <city> <name>Denver</name> <population>850,000</population> <annual-snowfall-in-inches>23</annual-snowfall-in-inches> </city> <city> <name>Rochester</name> <population>240,000</population> <annual-snowfall-in-inches>88</annual-snowfall-in-inches> </city> ...</facts-about-US-cities>


Prose equivalent

Here are facts about some US cities. The city of Denver has a population of 850,000 and an annual snowfall of 23 inches. The city of Rochester has a population of 240,000 and an annual snowfall of 88 inches. The city of Palm Spring has a population of 48,000 and an annual snowfall of 0 inches.


Modeler prepares “peritext” segments

Element text-before text-after

facts-about-US-cities"Here are facts about some US cities."

empty

city " The city " "."

name "named " empty

population" has a population of "

empty

annual-snowfall-in-inches" and an annual snowfall of "

" inches"


Possible “semantic” view

Here are facts about some US cities. The city named Denver has a population of 850,000 and an annual snowfall of 23 inches. The city named Rochester has a population of 240,000 and an annual snowfall of 88 inches. The city named Palm Spring has a population of 48,000 and an annual snowfall of 0 inches.


What it allows during editing (in semantic view)

• Peritexts convey the semantic intentions of the modeler

• A semantic conversation takes place in the editing window (instead of a syntactic one)

• Fill-in sentences:– Make “tag abuse” embarrassing…– Likely to reduce some kinds of errors

• Other views / fragment viewing / hyperlink


Discussion

• This is not like defining an application– Not a stylesheet mechanism

• Peritexts (fixed here) could be allowed to vary with some parameters:– position among siblings– attribute value– etc.

• (Attributes should be treated)


Why does it work?

• Sometimes tricky (see paper), but…

• NL has very high affordance

• NL can act as it’s own metalanguage

• XML contents + NL usually mix pretty well


Intertextual semantics

• Meaning of a text fragment is given by placing it in a network of other texts

• That network can simply consist in a sentence (or “quasi-sentence”)

• Or more elaborate topology: peritexts can contain hyperlinks, determining sense-making / learning paths– Too much hyperlinking can spoil the idea!


Interpretation workflow

• d is document or fragment, H is a human• S(d) is the intertextual semantics of d• S(d) is in NL• S is machine computable• Actual meaning of d for H may vary:

– with H– for a same H, from one “reading” of S(d) to

another

d S(d) actual “meaning” of d for HS H


Interpretation workflow

d

d S(d)

H1

H1

H2

H2

H3

H3


Suggests a modeling process

• Modeler starts with the prose

• Identify peritexts

• Work out more and more abbreviated forms– Will correspond to different “views” in the

editor

• Tersest level gives markup

• Increase model usability?


Mixed content question revisited

• Known: can get rid of mixed content with<!ELEMENT text (#PCDATA)>

Example:<!ELEMENT (e1 | e2 | … | #PCDATA)*>

becomes:<!ELEMENT (e1 | e2 | … | text)*>

• Why does it feel bad?– Tags “text” are not abbreviations of any

reasonable peritexts!


Is NL too much to ask for?

• Relative to some “target” community

• Can go a long way (previous slide)

• Hyperlinks are allowed in peritexts– Allows defining “sense-making” or learning

paths

• (Almost) anything formal can be turned into NL…


NL as formalism common denominator

Expression in artificial formalism

Textbook explaining formalism STAPLER

Equivalent expression in NL


Editing setup without intertextual semantics

Modeler

Author

Valid XMLinstance or fragment

World

NL and presupposed

knowledge of target community

XML EDITOR

XML DTD

Doc. / tr.material


Editing setup with intertextual semantics

Modeler

Author

Valid XMLinstance or fragment

World

NL and presupposed

knowledge of target community

XML EDITOR

XML DTDtext-before

and text-aftersegments

NL equivalent



1. The problem


3. Conclusion

4. Question period


What it suggests

• Bring some of the discipline of producing “good documents” (manuals of style) into model & interface design– E.g., don’t abuse hyperlinking

• Litterate modeling, litterate interfaces– Litterate interface / interaction design

• Benefit: make explicit prerequisite knowledge & sense-making / learning paths


Other possible uses of intertextual semantics

• Legal documents with multiple renditions• NLP systems that cannot treat markup

– Including full-text indexing• <ex>Hamlet</ex>• “Exit Hamlet”

• Other data models– Ex.: relational

• Normal forms

– A new look at expressivity


Future work

• Editing:– Work out a few existing / new models– Properly integrate attributes– More powerful peritext computation– Implement ideas in a real editor

• Display peritexts when chosing insertion• Hyperlinks in displayed peritexts

– Experiment with real authors


Future work

• More than peritexts?

• More than NL (icons, sound, …)?

• Compare with other semantic frameworks– Downstream semantics: Wrightson, Renear

et al.

• Other models

• Tackle litterate modeling / interface design


Merci!

Questions?

Documents

Yves Marcoux - OLST-RALI - 21 mars 20071 Une approche basée sur la langue naturelle pour la modélisation de documents structurés Yves MARCOUX GRDS – EBSI