How to create role with language limitations?
Anne Massenkeil
.png?part=0.1&view=1)
stel...@uniroma2.it
Dear Anne,
From your expression “specific language capabilities” I wasn’t sure if interpreting it as:
“specific capabilities for language”
or “capabilities for specific languages”
:-)
In the doubt, I try to reply to both interpretations:
In the first case, that is defining new capabilities that are maybe more specific than generically saying “lexicalization” (which is a sort of trigger for everything related to language modeling) you can create new roles and define for them even very specific capabilities. You may check this page:
https://vocbench.uniroma2.it/doc/user/roles_adm.jsf
listing all capabilities. In the table on section “Capabilities Vocabuary” the first row, related to RDF editing, is the relevant one for you.
In case you meant how to assign different languages to different users, that is not done there; it is decoupled in a different section, related to assignment of users to projects:
https://vocbench.uniroma2.it/doc/user/projects_adm.jsf#project-users_management
so, each user can be assigned to any project and from there they can be given specific roles (local to the assignment of the user to that specific project) and languages (same, the languages assigned to the user are local to that project only). The “assigned languages” are those where the user has the capability for editing their content. So, a user may be given the lexicographer role and be able to every sort of lexicalization (rdfs labels, skos labels, skos-xl labels, ontolex lexical entries..) and yet, if a given language is not assigned to them, they can’t edit those elements if the content language is in a language they are not assigned to
Hope this replies to your inquiry :-)
Armando
From: vocben...@googlegroups.com <vocben...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Anne Massenkeil
Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2025 2:17 PM
To: vocbench-user <vocben...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [vocbench-user] How to create role with language limitations?
Hello,
I'd like to create different lexicographer roles with specific language capabilities. How can I define the additional language restrictions?
Thanks!
Anne
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vocbench-user" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vocbench-use...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vocbench-user/37c0d890-e6e1-42ba-9693-11ede4a41655n%40googlegroups.com.
Anne Massenkeil
Anne Massenkeil
We don't want to simply add the "validator" capabilities (rdf "RV") to the lexicographer role because the validation then becomes too broad and allows validation for all onboarded users (vs. just the users' own actions).
Roland Wingerter
Hi Anne,
1. If you want a user to have lexicographer and validator capabilities, you simply assign both predefined roles to her/him (see screenshot). No need to define a new role. User rights are project-specific, and a user can have more than one role per project.
2. VB3 Search has many options, but it does not support wildcards. Check out https://vocbench.uniroma2.it/doc/user/data_view.jsf#the_search_bar.
Kind regards
Roland
Roland Wingerter
Roland Wingerter
1. If you want a user to have lexicographer and validator capabilities, you can assign both predefined roles to her/him (see screenshot attached). Note that user rights are project-specific, and a user can have more than one role per project.
Kind regards
Roland
stel...@uniroma2.it
Dear Anne,
follow up to Roland’s msg with some complementary information.
- we’ll look into the issue with the “V”. Actually, I’ve performed some tests and I think I found a possible mistake in your case (at least I can’t recreate your issue if I properly configure the role, so mine is only an educated guess on what you might have done wrong) but then, I got stuck on another problem.
So, I can’t tell from your screenshot whether you created a role containing only lexicalization with CRUDV and nothing else (this was my guess). If you need to check all data, you need to have (rdf,”R”) at least in addition to anything else. My suggestion is that you clone the lexicographer role and then add only the “V” to the lexicalization capability.
This way everything should work except that…I tried to go on the validation screen and I still can only reject, not accept. The “reject” is always available as a special option in the validation screen, that is applicable to your own actions. We added that as a way to allow everybody to check their own actions and reject them (a form of UNDO) if they discovered they made a mistake. So, modulo the reject, which is available for the explained reasons, it seems the added “V” is not having any effect. I should check whether this is a bug, or a limitation we had at the time for which validation in the case of the RDF “area” cannot be detailed to specific capabilities.
Apologies in advance, it’s a very busy period closing various things before summer but we will try to address this at the soonest and come back to you.
- Concerning the wildcards, I confirm what Roland said. Simply, most users didn’t want to deal with wildcards and use instead a series of “prepackaged” searches working on the whole search string. However, good news is that we will add this search (it will be simply using all common search engine syntax, so all tokens will be assumed to be optional (but the more you hit the more the result goes up in the ranking), if you want the whole string you have to use “”, you can use all wildcards, Boolean expressions etc..) and it will be probably available in a major release we will do within the year.
Kind Regards,
Armando
From: vocben...@googlegroups.com <vocben...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Roland Wingerter
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2025 1:49 PM
To: vocbench-user <vocben...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [vocbench-user] How to create role with language limitations?
Hi Anne,
1. If you want a user to have lexicographer and validator capabilities, you simply assign both predefined roles to her/him (see screenshot). No need to define a new role. User rights are project-specific, and a user can have more than one role per project.
2. VB3 Search has many options, but it does not support wildcards. Check out https://vocbench.uniroma2.it/doc/user/data_view.jsf#the_search_bar.
Kind regards
Roland
Anne Massenkeil schrieb am Dienstag, 15. Juli 2025 um 13:59:19 UTC+2:
Hi, I had a follow up question on roles please:
In addition to configuring languages for the lexicographer role, we want to add advanced validation capabilities since reject seems to be the only validation task that is available with the out of the box-lexicographer role setting. I tried selecting "validate" ("CRUDV") at role config (see below) but it leads to the data tab being inaccessible. Is this FAD? We are using VB3.
We don't want to simply add the "validator" capabilities (rdf "RV") to the lexicographer role because the validation then becomes too broad and allows validation for all onboarded users (vs. just the users' own actions).
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vocbench-user/4a276a19-166a-4552-99cf-a1c65edca7c1n%40googlegroups.com.
stel...@uniroma2.it
Dear Anne,
quick follow up to my earlier msg. I can confirm that, unfortunately, it is a known limitation (sorry for having to investigate, but it’s something deep buried in the past).
At the moment the validation operation can’t be broken up among the single capabilities (even if the capability/roles editor allows for that). Enabling it is not a piece of cake and, in these years, it never came as a request, so we addressed many other priorities.
While I’m not excluding that we will address this in the future, I’m looking at possible alternative directions: One thing that I’m not sure of is whether you are aiming at a user that can validate themself (basically as an exception to the normal validation, which you still want, otherwise you would simply not use validation for the project).
If that is the case, then a possible alternative is to simply allow for an exception to the validation for some users (i,e some users are considered real experts and simply skip the validation process, which still stays in place for all other users)
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vocbench-user/019e01dbf7d9%2418ad8330%244a088990%24%40uniroma2.it.
Anne Massenkeil
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "vocbench-user" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/vocbench-user/B61Bi_uCX1U/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to vocbench-use...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vocbench-user/034e01dbf815%2403e7dbd0%240bb79370%24%40uniroma2.it.