Re: [agenda} Web Annotation WG teleconf Agenda (2014-11-12)

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com> wrote:

> On Nov 11, 2014, at 4:31 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
>
> >> 3 Web Annotation Data Model
> >> Review updated ED draft
> >> http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/model_fpwd/
> > We should also decide on a github repo, and reflecting this on the new
> unofficial editor's drafts repo [1].
>
> yes
>

We have started using the one that Ivan set up for us, hence the above URL.
   https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation
Which is where we have the issue tracking.  So I would propose that we
continue to use it.

>> Approve shortname 'web-annotation’ (or alternative)
> > I suggest that we come up with a more discrete shortname for each of our
> deliverables, since they all pertain to web annotation.
> > Since this is specifically about the data model, maybe
> 'web-anno-data-model', 'web-anno-model', or 'web-anno-vocab’
> agree, wa-model probably too close to ws*,  suggest webanno-model
>

I think we need to discuss the consequences of the selection as a group.
For example, if that means we have TR/web-anno-data-model/ and
TR/web-anno-vocab/ rather than (for example) TR/web-annotation/model/ ,
then that's pretty important.

Especially as the current document contains model, vocab and serialization
but we may wish to split that up in the future, or we may wish to keep it
as it is.

Let's not be hasty :)

Rob

-- 
Rob Sanderson
Technology Collaboration Facilitator
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305