W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > November 2014

Re: Representing annotation goals

From: Joël Kuiper <me@joelkuiper.eu>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 10:25:14 +0100
Cc: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <4DE24FCA-FAEA-472A-BD25-8F0DA2A7360E@joekuiper.eu>
To: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
Hey Rob, 

Thanks for the help!

The issue is that they’re all highlights in my case (as oa:TextQuoteSelector), so would it make sense to do something like this?

new:interesting a oa:Motivation
	skos:inScheme oa:motivationScheme ; 
	skos:broader oa:highlighting ; 

 <urn:uuid:...> a oa:Annotation ;
    oa:hasBody <http://example.com/document#annotation <http://example.com/document#annotation>> ;
    oa:motivatedBy new:interesting ;
    oa:hasTarget <http://example.com/document <http://example.com/document#annotation>> ;

 <http://example.com/document#annotation <http://example.com/document#annotation>> a oa:SpecificResource ;
    oa:hasSource <http://example.com> ;
    oa:hasSelector <urn:uuid:x> .

<urn:uuid:x> a oa:TextQuoteSelector ;
    oa:exact “..." ;
    oa:prefix “..." ;
    oa:suffix “...” .

Where (though skos schema’s as described here http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/appendices.html#ExtendingMotivations <http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/appendices.html#ExtendingMotivations>) the highlighting motivation is extended to be “interesting” or whatever the user defined?
In reality these annotations can be far more semantic than just commenting or remarking. Eventually the idea is to let the user define highlights from (biomedical) ontologies, so parts of scientific publications can be annotated with well-defined concepts.
For example in publications regarding clinical trials one might want to highlight specific parts of the text where the phenotypes expressed with SNOMED-CT or the Human Phenotype Ontology. 

What would be the preferred way of expressing such a “highlighting with a concept” relation in OA?


Kind regards,
Joël


> On 03 Nov 2014, at 18:20, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Joël,
> 
> That's exactly what the motivations are intended for.  The motivation is to criticize the target resource, or to remark on them.  I'd question whether remark has any more significance than the current oa:commenting, however.
> 
> For tagging resources as interesting or boring, you could simply use a second oa:Tag (or preferably oa:SemanticTag) body resource.
> 
> Hope that helps,
> 
> Rob 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 6:00 AM, Joël Kuiper <me@joelkuiper.eu <mailto:me@joelkuiper.eu>> wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> I’m currently making a system in which a user can create highlights with different meanings.
> For example a user can “criticise” or “remark”, or simply annotate parts as “boring” or “interesting”.
> The user is in control of these categories.
> 
> I was wondering how best to represent that as Open Annotation triples.
> The oa:motivatedBy doesn’t seem to fit. Right now I simply amend the oa:Annotation with a custom statement
> 
>   <urn:uri:...> a oa:Annotation ;
>     oa:hasBody <http://example.com/document#annotation <http://example.com/document#annotation>> ;
>     :category @interesting ;
>     oa:motivatedBy oa:describing ;
>     oa:hasTarget <http://example.com/document <http://example.com/document>> .
> 
> Would this be the way to go, or am I overlooking something in the specs?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Joël
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Rob Sanderson
> Technology Collaboration Facilitator
> Digital Library Systems and Services
> Stanford, CA 94305
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2014 09:25:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:06 UTC