W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Style

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:20:57 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtm=8h0VQ4otnQrSW1JKBtFGwLUFQB+zmeR2ROcD1XM46w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Cc: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
I agree on this approach, to foster reuse of a specific resource.

I have run into the same issue, in particular for the cases where the
specific resource has its own (typically non-information-like) URI as
well, as we have discussed here.


Perhaps as hasStyle would not really apply to any kind of annotation,
mainly visual/highlight ones, its domain could be a subclass
StyledAnnotation, of which subclasses could be oax:Highlight. (Some
instances of other subclasses could of course also be
StyledAnnotation). From this I wonder if hasStyle should move to oax:
as well - but perhaps not, as we would want anyone who does styling to
use hasStyle as a starting point.


On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [Moderator bouncing message, stripped of attachment which was to big for
> mailing list size limit.
>  The attachment is archived at:
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2012Jul/att-0038/proposal_style.png>]
>
> Dear all,
>
> There was an offline discussion last week concerning the current use
> of oa:hasStyle being attached to the Specific Resources which we
> should continue online in the larger group.
>
> The concerns that were raised with the current model for style:
>
> * Specific Resource nodes cannot be re-used between annotations, as
> someone might attach a Style to it in another annotation, thereby
> changing all of the uses of the Specific Resource.  If the nodes
> cannot be reused, then they're significantly less valuable
> (essentially they may as well be blank nodes!)
> * The Specific Resources would then identify the section of the
> representation, rather than a styled section of the representation.
>
> * Conceptually the style is for the Annotation.  It would be cleaner
> if it were attached to the Annotation rather than the individual
> Specific Resources.
> * It would thus be somewhat easier to ignore for clients that don't
> expect to process it.
>
> * The CssValueStyle class is a nasty hack -- it's not a valid CSS
> file.  If we're just creating our own hack, we can do it in a
> different way just as easily.
>
>
> And after some discussion the proposed change was:
>
> Instead of attaching to the Specific Resource, oa:hasStyle would
> attach to the Annotation.  The object of the relationship would be a
> valid CSS file that describes all of the stylistic features for the
> resources that are part of the annotation graph.
> A diagram form is attached.
>
> There is a slight loss in functionality if we adopt this approach, as
> any alternative style format would need a means to address the
> resources in the annotation graph.  Thus it would be more difficult to
> use, for example, XSLT as a styling language.
>
> The current requirements from the use cases and stakeholders are only
> for describing stylistic or rendering features, rather than arbitrary
> transformations.  For example, red strike-through and yellow
> background is required, but we don't have a strong case for
> transformation of arbitrary XML into HTML or JPEG into PNG.
>
> Please weigh in with your thoughts!
>
> Thanks,
> Rob & Paolo
>



-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2012 08:21:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 August 2012 08:21:50 GMT