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

Re: Last draft comment: Specifiers and Specific Resources

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 14:31:14 -0700
Message-ID: <CABevsUEC9Yvko8B_Bzhui8aPRn-D9QxfjFTj21gKABvW+a30ZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
Added it in explicitly as a forward (cross?) reference from Style to
Multiplicity, and gave it as a second example use case for oa:List.

Thanks!

Rob

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:
> On 2/4/13 5:28 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Antoine Isaac<aisaac@few.vu.nl>  wrote:
>>
>>> Let's try again. The case I have in mind is
>>>
>>> <ann>  a oa:Annotation ;
>>>   oa:hasBody<body1>  ;
>>>   oa:hasBody<body2>  .
>>> <body1>  oa:styleClass "important" .
>>> <body2>  oa:styleClass "emphasis" .
>>>
>>> No multiplicity involved here. But "important" and "emphasis" are defined
>>> in
>>> *two different styles*. Say,<style1>  and<style2>.
>>>
>>> Attaching both styles at the level of the annotation is possible:
>>> <ann>  a oa:Annotation ;
>>>   oa:styledBy<style1>  ;
>>>   oa:styledBy<style2>  .
>>
>>
>> This is where the multiplicity comes in.  oa:styledBy currently says:
>>      "The relationship between an Annotation and the oa:Style.
>>       There MAY be 0 or 1 styledBy relationships for each Annotation."
>>
>> So hence you would need<ann>  oa:styledBy<List>  ;<List>  oa:item
>> <style1>,<style2>
>> Then you would know which style had precedence due to the order of the
>> list.
>>
>>
>>> But then I'm unclear how a data consumer would know which is the style
>>> that
>>> corresponds to each class. They could inspect the styles and see whether
>>> there's a corresponding class in it. But this could have issues (e.g. two
>>> styles defining a same class but with different stylings).
>>
>>
>> Yes, this is what I meant by the styles having conflicting class
>> definitions.
>>
>>
>>> And of course Stian's suggestion that<anno>  could have some other
>>> property,
>>> with a value that would be styled according to a third style, would make
>>> the
>>> picture even more confusing.
>>> Or is it just the case that such mind-boggling situations are *not
>>> allowed*
>>> in OA?
>>
>>
>> Currently they're not allowed, unless you profess to know what you're
>> doing by using a multiplicity construct :)
>
>
>
>
> OK! I suppose this fully alleviates my concerns. I had missed the list thing
> in the doc (is it there?). It seems a good solution...
>
> Antoine
>
Received on Monday, 4 February 2013 21:31:40 UTC

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