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

Re: F2F Decision: Multiple Resources

From: Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 16:49:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CADUi7O4EL6Pp9z5KbQhwF9w+8+wu6MjoJBsaV_qVySAz08D2zw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
Cc: Jacob Jett <jgjett@gmail.com>, public-openannotation@w3.org
Ah, I see.  I think I agree it's an interesting model.

One issue is that it requires(?)  non-anonymous node as the referenced
oa:item in the original. Not sure how important that is.

It's a little like dcterms:references, I think.


On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Paolo Ciccarese
<paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jacob,
> I've never thought about the use of oax:annotatedIn for targeting one of the
> bodies.
> However, that seems an interesting use case.
>
> Is this what you mean?
>
> _:x a oa:Annotation ;
>   oa:hasBody <choice1> ;
>   oa:hasTarget <ny-times-article> .
>
> <choice1> a oa:Choice ;
>   oa:default <comment-in-french> ;
>   oa:item <comment-in-english> ;
>   oa:item <comment-in-spanish> .
>
> _:y a oa:Annotation ;
>   oa:hasBody <body> ;
>   oa:hasTarget <comment-in-french> ;
>   oa:annotatedIn _:x .
>
> After Chicago [1], the decision was to introduce a new predicate:
> oax:annotatedIn from a
> SpecificResource to any Resource (including a SpecificResource). The idea
> was simply to identify
> something the user was looking at when performing the annotation.
>
> That is very easy to understand when I think of an HTML document embedding
> other media.
> The question is if we want to extend that definition to annotation of
> annotation parts.
>
> Would anybody see a problem is using the property oax:annotatedIn (or the
> later proposed
> oax:asIncludedIn) for the annotation of annotation parts use case?
>
> Paolo
>
>
>
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-openannotation/2012Oct/0003.html
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Jacob Jett <jgjett@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ...but couldn't this already be done in the model by annotating the
>> initial multi-body (oa:Choice) annotation? More specifically, couldn't we
>> annotate one of the choices and use the context predicate "oax:annotatedIn"
>> to capture the annotating an annotation bit?
>>
>> It seems like this might be very useful for your use case where, if we
>> were to model the different distinct possibilities as one oa:Choice, you
>> could then add an annotation targeting one of the objects of an oa:item
>> predicate within that choice, e.g., 'this is our default choice and here is
>> why', and use oax:annotatedIn to denote that this annotation noting a
>> default choice and the reasoning why (i.e., the evidence), was made in the
>> context of an oa:Choice.
>>
>> The modeling is complex but it seems like this would service the needs of
>> your use case without adding additional properties to the specification.
>> Does that seem sensible? Seems like there are some other ways to do this
>> too, including adding additional properties.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jacob
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> A typical use case for us would be a taxonomist's annotation of an
>>> image, or of a morphological description,  of  an organism for which
>>> the annotator is offering several different possible distinct species
>>> as an identification, but with no ability to say which of those
>>> species it may be.  In such cases, an "arbitrary" choice on the part
>>> of the consumer is not going to be based on preference, but on some
>>> kind of scientific evidence which possibly arises from related
>>> resources, or even from part of an annotation dialogue.  A second
>>> annotator, not the Target publisher,  who acquires the first
>>> annotation might well launch an annotation of the form "In Annotation
>>> X, I don't know what species the Target is, but I know it isn't
>>> Alternative A, and here's my evidence for that."   This is also likely
>>> to be a typical biomedical application where the resources are patient
>>> examination data and the goal is a medical diagnosis. In fact,
>>> taxonomists often refer to the descriptive data that distinguishes one
>>> species from another as"diagnostic characters."
>>>
>>> (Remark: in science, all choices between hypotheses are based on
>>> evidence, which is why I'm gathering use cases to make a case for
>>> adding Evidence modeling to OA.  I'd even go so far as to suggest that
>>> \all/ scholarship needs Evidence sooner or later to support its
>>> assertions....)
>>>
>>> Bob Morris
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > The XOR or Choice is to select one and only one of the resources.  For
>>> > example, if there are three translations of the same comment, a system
>>> > should display only one of them as appropriate for the user's
>>> > preferences (and potentially allow the user to se the other options).
>>> > On the other hand, given an oa:Set of three comments, all three should
>>> > be displayed.
>>> >
>>> > Hope that helps,
>>> >
>>> > Rob
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Leyla Jael García Castro
>>> > <leylajael@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> Hi Bob,
>>> >>
>>> >> Do you have a use case for the ao:XOR? Not so sure whether I
>>> >> understand it.
>>> >>
>>> >> Cheers,
>>> >>
>>> >> Leyla
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> With respect to the Multiple Resources model[1] that emerged in
>>> >>> Chicago
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 1. It would be nice if the Issues List reflected what Rob's initial
>>> >>> proposal morphed into, and the discussion continued there. (Rob: I'll
>>> >>> have a
>>> >>> try if you want...)
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2. oa:Set and probably oa:List can profitably be applied to  a
>>> >>> collection
>>> >>> of oa:Annotations.  The use case is actionable annotations that are
>>> >>> delivered to remote agents,  and upon which collections of expected
>>> >>> actions
>>> >>> must taken, possibly in a prescribed order.  This is particularly
>>> >>> needed
>>> >>> when actionable annotations will generate response annotations (e.g.
>>> >>> "Agent
>>> >>> Smart accepted all of your corrections in the oa:Set :mySet1 except
>>> >>> the
>>> >>> oa:item :mySet1.item10.").  If a collection of actionable annotations
>>> >>> travels in a disconnected fashion, the annotation publisher can not
>>> >>> easily
>>> >>> (at all?) convey that a coordinated action is desired.  There may be
>>> >>> an
>>> >>> argument for ao:XOR on collections of annotations also.  It's likely
>>> >>> that
>>> >>> none of these collection types should be restricted to Target, Body,
>>> >>> and
>>> >>> Specifiers, as is perhaps being suggested in [1]
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 3.  Probably oa:List objects cannot(?) survive being put in a triple
>>> >>> store, since order of identified nodes is not defined in the graph.
>>> >>> [2] is a
>>> >>> proposal to address the issue, but it is unclear how much traction it
>>> >>> has.
>>> >>> This means that  processing order for oa:List will depend on the
>>> >>> serialization, not on the RDF.  I vaguely recall this was raised in
>>> >>> Chicago,
>>> >>> perhaps tabled for more discussion.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> [1]
>>> >>>
>>> >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-openannotation/2012Oct/0004.html#start4
>>> >>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws14
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Bob Morris
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Robert A. Morris
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Emeritus Professor  of Computer Science
>>> >>> UMASS-Boston
>>> >>> 100 Morrissey Blvd
>>> >>> Boston, MA 02125-3390
>>> >>>
>>> >>> IT Staff
>>> >>> Filtered Push Project
>>> >>> Harvard University Herbaria
>>> >>> Harvard University
>>> >>>
>>> >>> email: morris.bob@gmail.com
>>> >>> web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/
>>> >>> web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush
>>> >>> http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
>>> >>> ===
>>> >>> The content of this communication is made entirely on my
>>> >>> own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express
>>> >>> official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or
>>> >>> Harvard
>>> >>> University.
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Robert A. Morris
>>>
>>> Emeritus Professor  of Computer Science
>>> UMASS-Boston
>>> 100 Morrissey Blvd
>>> Boston, MA 02125-3390
>>>
>>> IT Staff
>>> Filtered Push Project
>>> Harvard University Herbaria
>>> Harvard University
>>>
>>> email: morris.bob@gmail.com
>>> web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/
>>> web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush
>>> http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
>>> ===
>>> The content of this communication is made entirely on my
>>> own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express
>>> official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or
>>> Harvard University.
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
> http://www.paolociccarese.info/
> Biomedical Informatics Research & Development
> Instructor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School
> Assistant in Neuroscience at Mass General Hospital
> +1-857-366-1524 (mobile)   +1-617-768-8744 (office)
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the addressee(s),
> may contain information that is considered
> to be sensitive or confidential and may not be forwarded or disclosed to any
> other party without the permission of the sender.
> If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
> immediately.
>



-- 
Robert A. Morris

Emeritus Professor  of Computer Science
UMASS-Boston
100 Morrissey Blvd
Boston, MA 02125-3390

IT Staff
Filtered Push Project
Harvard University Herbaria
Harvard University

email: morris.bob@gmail.com
web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/
web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush
http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
===
The content of this communication is made entirely on my
own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express
official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or
Harvard University.
Received on Monday, 29 October 2012 20:49:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 29 October 2012 20:49:50 GMT