marl / marl/jams-data

Conventions for annotation_rules?

Open
#2 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

question
Dominant language
Python
Stars
27
Forks
3
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Since #1 is putting us on the path toward re-importing all the existing datasets, we may want to settle on some conventions for the annotation_rules field in AnnotationMetadata.

I'm mainly thinking of tagging data, where there are a few modes of annotation that are common (strong vs weak, positive-only, etc.) Maybe other tasks also have a small set of standard conventions that we can list out here and use in the parse scripts?

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Review issue #1's re-import plan, the AnnotationMetadata model, and the existing parse scripts. Identify the common annotation modes that need conventions for annotation_rules, then define the standard set and confirm how the parse scripts should apply them. Done means the conventions are agreed and their intended use in parsing is documented.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
data-engineering
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.