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

Selection Filtering

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 16:09:31 -0600
Message-ID: <CABevsUEgLM0yuBfo5wxGbw7d1R2y+Ya8yoXbRxOqgZMjkMW=vA@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
Starting a new thread on this topic for ease of tracking :)

In other a couple of other threads, the desire to describe an
annotation which targets a resource in some particular context was
expressed.
For example, to annotate an image only as it appears in a particular html page.

The base requirement seems to me to be:
    Annotate [part of] (resource) as it is used in (resource)

This extends quickly to:
    Annotate [part of] (resource) as it is used in [part of] (resource)
For example, annotate an image as it is used on page 4 of a PDF.

This could mean arbitrary nesting, to allow for annotating an image in
an html file in an ePub document.
The same should be applicable for bodies as well as targets, in order
to extract contents from container resources.

Is there a requirement for differentiating between the resource, and
the resource used in some container resource?
For example, is it important to be able to annotate an image, but not
have the annotation appear when that image is embedded within an HTML
page?
For annotating non-rendering resources (such as CSS, Javascript etc)
it might be important?

Is there a requirement for sets of container resources, or is it
sufficient to simply create new annotations? For example, this image
in these 3 HTML pages.


A second application of filtering, that makes me very nervous, is:
    Annotate all occurrences of (selection) in (set of resources)

For example all occurrences of the word "annotate" in any textual
resource, all occurrences of the top left pixel in JPEG images, all
occurrences of the first line of text in all copies of Shakespeare's
"Hamlet".


Before we start thinking about approaches and solutions, it would be
great to firmly scope what it is that we're trying to solve :)

Thanks,

Rob
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2012 22:09:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 August 2012 22:09:59 GMT