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

Re: Comments to “Bookmarking a Webpage”

From: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:00:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFPX2kAuY7M4WWz3Bd-Mx27bapEqFVjiF2+aXCuk8dkyH7Kz5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leyla Jael García Castro <leylajael@gmail.com>
Cc: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Leyla Jael García Castro <
leylajael@gmail.com> wrote:

> Comments to “Bookmarking a Webpage” at
> www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/SE_Bookmarking_a_Webpage
>
> The definition of bookmarking used in the example says “*In the context
> of the World Wide Web (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web) , a
> bookmark is a locally stored Uniform Resource Identifier (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Identifier)*”. However, it
> is also possible to save bookmarks not locally but online, for instance in
> delicious… maybe the Wikipedia page should be updated? Or maybe we should
> extend this definition in our example in order to also include online
> bookmarking systems.
>
>
>
> oa:annotatedAt and oa:serializedAt do not extend from
> w3prov:generatedAtTime but are inspired in, are not they? So the range
> should be xsd:dateTime  rather than plain Literals. Right now, as quotes
> are used for both, it is difficult to make clear the difference.
>
>
>
> I am not sure whether it is right to use a Literal as range for foaf:mbox.
> At http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_mbox, it says that Thing is the
> range… should it be an Object rather than a Literal?
>

Good catch, I'll convert that into mailto...


>
>
> Do we want to encourage the use of dctypes:Text along with
> cnt:ContextAsText? If the answer is yes, then we should add it to the
> figure as well as a note reminding that it is a MAY
>
>
>
That is probably a good idea.



> In the natural language explanations for the SPARQL queries, it should be
> ex:person1 rather than ex:Person1
>

I'll fix that.


>
>
> We have a type foaf:Person for ex:person1 but no type for ex:software1,
> should not is be a foaf:Agent?
>

There has been a discussion on that. I guess we can classify that as both
foaf:agent and  prov:SoftwareAgent


>
>
>
>
> In general
>
> Looking at this example I found a bit strange the relation oa:motivatedBy.
> With oa:annotatedBy and oa:generateBy it is possible to respond questions
> related to “who” while with oa:hasBody it is possible to respond questions
> related to “what”. Would not it better to have oa:hasMotivation rather than
> oa:motivatedBy?
>

I am assuming your oa:generateBy was a oa:serializedBy (if not let me know
where you saw that as I have to remove it). We discussed that aspect a
couple of time, the decision was simply to put that property in the same
form of annotatedBy and serializedBy.


>
>
> Should we include a legend at the beginning of the cookbook or maybe
> better in the introduction explaining the different “boxes” that we use in
> diagrams? Do the different colors mean something?  Also, should we use a
> different line type in order to distinguish mandatory properties from
> optional?
>

I can add the same description we have in the specs. I am supposed to use
the same notation. Unless I made mistakes :)

Paolo

-- 
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.
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2013 21:00:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 21:00:40 GMT