W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > July 2001

Re: Next telecon - Monday, 9 July 2001

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 23:56:22 +0100
Message-ID: <003a01c104dc$8dc070c0$90d993c3@z5n9x1>
To: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Cc: <www-annotation@w3.org>
> Agenda for Monday:

Could we add an update on the status of EARL w.r.t. Annotea? (Or, sort
it out on the list).

Things I'm wondering:-

* The distinction between EARL "reporting" and Annotea "annotating"
doesn't seem clear. EARL already has a mechanism for saying "this is
the thing that we're talking about", so I don't get why it would be in
an annotation. What would the annotation be about? Do we need a subset
of EARL to put in the annotation?
* How easy is it to modify the existing annotea tools to simply
generate EARL, as it is, straight up?
* Annotations have methods for saying "the content type of this body
is x". This is something that we still need to sort out amongst
ourselves: how to identify a piece of content as being EARL, and
whether or not we even need to.
* Annotea treats :Body content as parseType="literal", which is
incorrect in our case, because we're putting RDF in there. Having said
that, I'm not sure how it would fit into the annotation model if it
was left as RDF.
* Can't annotations be stored as XLinks?

cf. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-annotation/2001JanJun/0095

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2001 18:54:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:39 GMT