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

F2F Decision: Context

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 11:09:12 -0600
Message-ID: <CABevsUF4M+pKFUM2cDsqvaE3jTbL2acSL-841AcxhZm5NR1asg@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
*** Annotating a Resource in Context ***

The requirement was defined in two separate parts:

1. The resource was annotated when it was part of the rendering of
another resource
(but does not convey any notion of invalidation of the annotation)

2. The annotation is only valid when the annotated resource is part of
the rendering of another resource


The group consensus was that validity of annotations should not be
considered in scope for the current work, as it would mean allowing
all sorts of different types of validity to be expressed, not just
containership.  The consensus was also that "context" should be
narrowly defined as above, to ensure that all sorts of other
environmental factors that might occur were not included in the scope.
 Thus the operating system of the annotator is not "context" for this
part of the data model.

Use cases discussed included:

* Annotating an image in a page to say that it does not depict what
the page describes
* Annotating (part of) an image in a certain part of a page to say
that it is not the correct image for that location
(example: page with bio sketches, and one image is mistakenly used for
multiple people)
* Annotating a figure with a URI that is part of an academic paper,
where the context of the particular paper is important

The decision was to introduce a new predicate: oax:annotatedIn from a
SpecificResource to any Resource (including a SpecificResource)

Other options explored were:
* Lists/chains of Selectors, however the semantics weren't clear as to
whether it was a contextual selector or a regular use and was
particularly challenging when the context was part of a resource
rather than the entire resource.
* Whether or not the context was at the SpecificResource or Annotation
level.  If it was at the Annotation level, then a Body could not have
a context and this was considered desirable. Also multiple targets
would be very difficult to model.


The name is the only contentious aspect remaining, as it implies that
it can only be used for a target of the annotation.  We would like to
suggest the following revision:

oax:asIncludedIn  (domain oa:SpecificResource)  The object of the
predicate is a resource in which the subject is included, and was the
resource being viewed when the subject was used within the annotation
which has the subject as either body or target.

Other proposed names for the predicate will definitely be considered,
but should not use "context" and should convey the notion of inclusion
by reference (eg html) or value (eg pdf)

Thanks,

Rob & Paolo
Received on Monday, 1 October 2012 17:09:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 1 October 2012 17:09:40 GMT