Re: [model] Proposal: Allow motivatedBy on SpecificResource

I'm fine with that ... and to expand it slightly, it fits exactly into the
pattern of Fig 29+

{
  "@id": "http://example.org/anno1",
  "@type": "oa:Annotation",
  "body": {
    "@type": "oa:SpecificResource",
    "role": "commenting",
    "source": {
      "@id": "http://example.org/body1",
      "@type": "dctypes:Sound"
  },
  "target" : "http://example.org/target1"
}

The concern is about literals / embedded text, and following the same
pattern for consistency.

{
  "@id": "http://example.org/anno1",
  "@type": "oa:Annotation",
  "body": {
    "@type": "oa:SpecificResource",
    "role": "commenting",
    "source": {
      "@id": "http://example.org/body1",
      "@type": "oa:EmbeddedContent",
      "value": "I love this thing"
  },
  "target" : "http://example.org/target1"
}


Otherwise, if the role is NOT on the specific resource, and a specific
resource is needed, we would have an unnecessary node sitting between the
annotation and the specific resource just to hold the role.

Also, for the literal case, currently the literal body is the object of
oa:hasBody ... meaning ....

{
  "@id": "http://example.org/anno1",
  "@type": "oa:Annotation",
  "body": {
    "@type": "oa:SpecificResource",
    "role": "commenting",
    "body": "I love this thing"
  }
}

That seems extremely hacky and introduces ridiculous recursion
possibilities.  Even bodyValue : literal would be better -- at least that
could easily be translated into body {value: literal} more cleanly.

Rob


On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com
> wrote:

> In other words, this (figure 3 of the specs):
>
> "body": {
>     "@id":"http://example.org/body1",
>     "@type":"dctypes:Sound"
>  }
>
> Would become
>
> body" : [
>      {
>         "role" : "soundtrack",
>         "content" : {
>            "@id":"http://example.org/body1",
>            "@type":"dctypes:Sound"
>         }
>      }
>      …
>