W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Last Ultimate Final Call :)

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 09:29:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CABevsUHwbsHs4NQNp0b-yczi1ZtqPHgbRyR4-CvCBVDTcduizg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jacob Jett <jgjett@gmail.com>
Cc: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Jacob Jett <jgjett@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> So if I understand correctly oa:hasStyle & oa:hasScope will also be
> properties of oa:SpecificResources, is that correct?

hasScope and styleClass were always properties of SpecificResource,
it's just that now they help define what that Specific Resource
identifies.  In other words, if you reuse the Specific Resource, then
the resource includes the style and scope, which were previously
described as "Annotation specific".


> We did have a quick question on the lists and containers, can a
> specific resource have multiple sources?

No. 3.1 says:
The relationship between a Specific Resource and the resource that it
is a more specific representation of.
There MUST be exactly 1 oa:hasSource relationship associated with a
Specific Resource.

What was the use case for multiple sources? I assume that it can be
covered by Composite?

Thanks!

Rob

>
> Regards,
>
> Jacob
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
>> To summarize the changes, before Monday's launch:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Antoine:
>>> * Homogeneity of JSON context names
>> Done.
>>
>>> * Named / Embedded Graphs
>> Rewritten and reordered as suggested.
>>
>>> * Lists and Containers
>> Choice and Composite are subclasses of Alt and Bag, List is
>> dual-classed with an extensive note describing the issues.
>>
>>> * Specific Resources with Style and Scope
>> 3.1 rewritten to not include the diagram, and clarify that style and
>> scope are included in the definition of the identity of the specific
>> resource.
>>
>>> * Lack of consensus on Textual Bodies
>> No change.
>>
>> Rob
>>
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 16:29:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:03 UTC