I am sure the original headline made sense to its author, but I wonder how a natural language processor would react to it?
My reaction, being innocent of any prior knowledge of the actors or the software was: What deadline? Reading it as a report of a missed deadline.
It is almost a “who’s on first” type headline. The software’s name is “After the Deadline.”
That confusion resolved, I read:
Matt Mullenweg has just annouced on his blog that WordPress parent company Automattic is open sourcing After the Deadline, a natural-language spell-checking plugin for WordPress and TinyMCE that was only recently ushered into the Automattic fold.
Scarcely seven weeks after its acquisition was announced, After the Deadline’s core technology is being released under the GPL. Moreover, writes Mullenweg, “There’s also a new jQuery API that makes it easy to integrate with any text area.”
Interested parties can check out this demo or read the tech overview and grab the source code here.
I can use spelling/grammar suggestions. Particularly since I make the same mistakes over and over again.
Does that also mean I talk about the same subjects/entities over and over again? Or at least a limited range of subjects/entities?
Imagine a user configurable subject/entity “checker” that annotated recognized subjects/entities with an <a> element. Enabling the user to accept/reject the annotation.
Disambiguation at the point of origin.
The title of the original article could become:
“<a href=”http://automattic.com/”>Automattic</a> Open Sources Natural Language Spell-Checker <a href=”http://www.afterthedeadline.com/”>After the Deadline</a>”
Seems less ambiguous to me.
Certainly less ambiguous to a search engine.