Re: client/server model

To me, this is part of protocol, not the abstract model of what an
Annotation is.
We could certainly be clearer as to the distinct roles that different
systems play. I'll have a look at that today :)

That said, I think there will be many different workflows, and trying to
specify any or all of them would be difficult.

An automated system that processes suggested edit annotations, per Doug's
recent use case, would follow a very different set of steps to a human user
writing a comment about part of an image.

Rob



On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Denenberg, Ray <rden@loc.gov> wrote:

>
>
> Well, since you asked …
>
> I’m not very interested in conformance.  I recognize its importance but my
> interest in the client/server discussion is that I like to be able to
> understand the model of process flow and you need to name the pieces in
> order to describe the process.
>
>
>
> In my mind, this is the abstract process model.
>
>
>
> *There is a client, which I’ll call the “Annotation Client”.  *
>
> *It  does three things:*
>
> *1.       **Accepts annotations from a user agent. (Or annotation
> components: target URI, body, etc.)*
>
> *2.       **Queries the target resource to find out where annotations are
> to be posted.*
>
> *3.       **Posts the annotation.*
>
> *(I realize that the first is not included in out model, but it’s part of
> my mental model.)*
>
>
>
> *There is a server.  Actually two servers.  One is where the resource (to
> be annotated) resides.  The other is where the annotations for that
> resource reside. Since these can be different servers, there need to be two
> servers named in the model (and of course in any instance they can be the
> same server).  So for lack of a better name, I’ll call them the Resource
> Server and the Annotation Server.  The Annotation Client interacts with the
> Resource Server and the Annotation Server respectively, for steps 2 and 3
> above.*
>
>
>
> Now whether or not we actually include this abstract process model in one
> of our documents, my point is that this is the model that I infer from the
> model and protocol documents, but since we have never articulated it
> succinctly as such, I don’t really know for sure.  And if there are
> differing opinions about whether this is the abstract model, then that
> argues for including the real abstract processing model explicitly
> (normative or non-normative, I don’t care which).
>
>
>
> Ray
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Sanderson [mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2015 6:58 PM
>
> *To:* Denenberg, Ray
> *Cc:* Web Annotation
> *Subject:* Re: client/server model
>
>
>
>
>
> Revised content:
>
>     http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/model/wd/
>
>
>
> The majority mentions of client that are left in are when there was an
> opinion about conformance.  For example that clients need not process
> Styles, either using the Style class or when embedded in SVG selectors.
>  Also the word "application" is used synonymously with "client".
>
>
>
> Are there opinions about where this sort of thing should live?  Is this a
> good on ramp to the levels of conformance discussion for the model?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Yes and Yes :)  I'll try and generally reduce the client/server discussion
> in the model document as unnecessary once we have a protocol spec.
>
>
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Denenberg, Ray <rden@loc.gov> wrote:
>
> Thank, Rob.  Just to confirm my understanding:. Two questions:
>
>
>
> (1)
>
> * client: A system that receives an annotation …..
>
>
>
> Is it safe to say this means “A system that requests and receives an
> annotation from the server …”
>
>
>
> I don’t mean to be Captain Obvious, but it probably would be a good idea
> to spell this out.  “Receives an annotation” could be interpreted to mean
> “receives an annotation from a user (which it will then submit to the
> server”.
>
>
>
> (2)
>
> Do I understand correctly that the process of creating of an annotation is
> not (yet) covered by these definitions?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Ray
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Sanderson [mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2015 4:23 PM
> *To:* Denenberg, Ray
> *Cc:* Web Annotation
> *Subject:* Re: client/server model
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Ray,
>
>
>
> That's a great question!  In the community group, we intentionally didn't
> discuss protocol between clients and servers and left that for future work.
>
> The use of client (or equivalent 'consuming client') and server in the
> model should only ever be informative rather than requiring behavior.
> Behaviors should be in the protocol specification.  I'll go through and
> work on that, as we were probably not at all rigorous.
>
>
>
> The implicit understanding of client and server in the model doc at the
> moment I think are:
>
>
>
> * client: A system that receives an annotation according to this model
>
> * server: A system that makes available an annotation according to this
> model
>
>
>
> So just the base line retrieval function (and not even specifying how),
> rather than creation of the annotation or discovery of annotations
> according to some criteria.
>
>
>
> Does that answer your questions?
>
>
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Denenberg, Ray <rden@loc.gov> wrote:
>
> This is a fairly basic question about the model.
>
>
>
> I’m trying to write an annotation profile (to profile the Web annotation
> model for bibliographic applications).  I’d like to express parts of it in
> terms of client/server  modeling.
>
>
>
> The current model (http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/) hint at such a
> thing, it uses the terms “client” and “server”,   but doesn’t define them.
> Also, the terms “client” and “consuming client” are used, and I am not sure
> what is the difference (if there is any difference).
>
>
>
> In the model in my mind, there is a user with an interest in a resource,
> and wants to do one (or both) of the following:
>
> 1.       Find annotations on the resource
>
> 2.       Annotate the resource
>
>
>
> ·         I assume the *annotation client* is the client that performs
> these requests on the users behalf. Does “consuming client” refer to #1
> above, that is, the client consumes annotations on behalf of the user?
>
> ·          The *annotation server*. The client is going to have to
> interact both with the server where the resource resides and the server
> where the annotations reside.  These could be different servers.
>
>
>
> It might be useful to clarify this in the model.
>
>
>
> Ray
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Rob Sanderson
>
> Information Standards Advocate
>
> Digital Library Systems and Services
>
> Stanford, CA 94305
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Rob Sanderson
>
> Information Standards Advocate
>
> Digital Library Systems and Services
>
> Stanford, CA 94305
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Rob Sanderson
>
> Information Standards Advocate
>
> Digital Library Systems and Services
>
> Stanford, CA 94305
>



-- 
Rob Sanderson
Information Standards Advocate
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305