Re: Annotation Serializations

Hey Paolo,

On 19 Jan 2014, at 21:43 , Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Ivan and Doug,
> I believe the HTML use case can be very useful. 
> 
> The proposed code brings up the use of rdf:value vs cnt:chars that is currently recommended in the specs.
> The use of Content in RDF  ( http://www.w3.org/TR/Content-in-RDF10/ ) has been discussed multiple times within the Community Group.
> 
> This is how an embedded body looks like according to specs:
> 
> <body1> a cnt:ContentAsText, dctypes:Text ;
>     cnt:chars "content" ;
>     dc:format "text/plain" .
> 
> And this is a textual Tag:
> 
> <tag1> a oa:Tag, cnt:ContentAsText ;
>     cnt:chars "tag" .
> 
> 

Thanks. That being said, for the purpose of simplicity, we should be careful separating what the spec says and what the user really needs to add. In the example above, I would expect (though have not checked) that the domain of the cnt:chars is defined for the cnt vocabulary to be cnt:ContentAsText. That means that an RDFS aware processor should be able to deduce that type information; there is no reason to ask the user to do that.

I am not sure what to do about the dc:format thing. Adding that to the RDFa code would complicate things; the user would have to add an extra <span> or something that, frankly, they would regard superfluous and hence we can bet they will forget...

But we are getting into the details that may have to be discussed in a Working Group if we get there...

Ivan



> Best,
> Paolo
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
> Hi, Ivan–
> 
> 
> On 1/19/14 2:39 PM, Ivan Herman wrote:
> Ok. I accept these as proofs that an HTML based serialization fulfill
> a real demand. How would we do that is something that a possible WG
> will have to define/show; having some ideas jotted down on the wiki
> will be useful.
> 
> Done:
>  http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/Serializations
> 
> 
> 
> But I do not think we should disregard JSON either, I could see use
> cases for that, too. Eg, if the annotation cannot be attached to the
> core text (this is the way Diigo, as well as most of the ebook
> reading system, do it) but are rather stored outside the text (eg, on
> a server), then the simplicity of JSON, as well as its wide usage in
> different tools, becomes a big plus.
> 
> I absolutely agree. JSON is going to be an extremely common interchange and wire format.
> 
> 
> 
> The beauty of OA is that it defines an abstract model, and the
> serialization is well separated. That is a major feature to embrace
> and showing/documenting different serializations is a major asset..
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> 
> 
> (Thanks to Doug for having started this...)
> 
> And thank you for giving me the opportunity to make my proposal more coherent, and for improving my crappy code.
> 
> Regards-
> -Doug Schepers
> W3C Developer Relations Lead
> Project Coordinator for SVG, WebApps, Touch Events, and Audio
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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
> Member of the MGH Biomedical Informatics Core
> +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.


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Digital Publishing Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
GPG: 0x343F1A3D
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf