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

Re: Connecting multiple fragment selectors with individual bodies

From: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 16:32:37 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFPX2kAXVy8WioeQ1+XpWSZM=e6a1Doey3vaOVK266UnFi_bHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Cc: Leyla Jael García Castro <leylajael@gmail.com>, Lutz Suhrbier <l.suhrbier@bgbm.org>, public-openannotation@w3.org
Rob,

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Paolo,
>
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Paolo Ciccarese
> <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Rob,
> > to me, what Lutz is doing looks more linking separate annotation with a
> > semantics that, however, in his example is not very explicit. It looks,
> to
> > me, very similar to what Kevin was doing with the annotations based on
> other
> > annotations.
>
> Agreed, though I was going from Lutz's response to my initial question
> where he says:
>
> In that case, it makes no sense to have 5 non-related annotations for
> that kind of annotations, because the annotation is only valuable, if
> all of the related elements can be expressed within a single
> annotation !
>
> So I think that both approaches could be valid.
>
> > I see grouping the annotation with the Composite Annotation as orthogonal
> > and therefore as possible on top of what Lutz is already doing.
>
> Agree that linking annotations and grouping them are somewhat
> orthogonal, hence my red 'x:rel' placeholder relationship between the
> annotations in the diagram.
>
>
> > Just to give a little more background about the grouping of annotation,
> Rob
> > and I had a side conversation and we see three different levels of
> > aggregations:
> > - Annotation Set (by topic, purpose....)
> >    - Composite Annotation
> >       - Annotations
> > I am assuming I could also nest additional levels. Like a
> > CompositeAnnotation hasAnnotation another CompositeAnnotation.
>
> Where a set of annotations is collection created for some reason and
> the individual annotations can be re-aggregated into other arbitrary
> sets, but a Composite Annotation is a construction for maintaining all
> of the annotations together, and hence the annotations that compose it
> should not be disaggregated.
>
>
>
So if I have:
Annotation1
basedOn Annotation2
basedOn Annotation3
and
Annotation2
basedOn Annotation4
basedOn Annotation5

If all the annotation tasks have been performed in the same *context* I
would probably create one single CompositeAnnotation that lnks all all of
them. If I created the second part first - forgive the numeration - I could
have a CompositeAnnotation1 linking Annotation2, Annotation4 and
Annotation5. Then a CompositeAnnotation2 linking Annotation1, Annotation2
and Annotation3. As we know that Annotation2 is based on Annotation4 and
Annotation5 because of the relationships, we can now rebuild the hierarchy.

Is that what you mean?

Paolo
Received on Monday, 13 August 2012 20:33:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 13 August 2012 20:33:06 GMT