[CWB] Classification metadata

[Hardie, Andrew]

The classification metadata system doesn’t really support this kind of ontology. It’s designed for disjunct and mutually exhaustive category lists. You can create categories representing sets of fields if you want, but the result would be almost useless. (e.g. to search in all neurology texts you’d have to tick on every single category that includes neurology in its set… and distribution stats would be meaningless)

Andrew.

From: cwb-bounces at sslmit.unibo.it <cwb-bounces at sslmit.unibo.it> On Behalf Of Graham Ranger -- UAPV
Sent: 19 June 2025 07:37
To: Open source development of the Corpus WorkBench <cwb at sslmit.unibo.it>
Subject: [CWB] Classification metadata

Hello to all,
A quick question re: classification metadata. In a historical corpus of medical case studies, it would be nice to include classification information on the field of medicine concerned. However, in many cases, several fields are involved. The solution to this might be just to indicate field_1, field_2, field_3, etc., but this makes restricted searches a little unwieldy. I was wondering if there is a more elegant way of doing this, something like just one field, with boolean alternatives i.e. "neurology|gastroenterology|neurology", for a fictitious case involved these three fields, "neurology|gastroenterology" for a case involving just there two fields, etc.
I hope this makes sense. Thanks in advance for any assistance.
Best wishes,
Graham.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://liste.sslmit.unibo.it/pipermail/cwb/attachments/20250620/fd651846/attachment.html>