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

Re: Next telecon - Monday, 9 July 2001

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:22:55 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, <www-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0107050816550.19230-100000@tux.w3.org>
I would like to talk about EARL and annotea too. More interspersed...

On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Sean B. Palmer wrote:
[snip]
  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?

CMN No, it wouldn't need to be a subset, it should be EARL. The value of
Annotea is a mechanism for finding EARL reports - just one of several
possibilities, but I think an intersting one nonetheless, in part becuase it
is built on similar technology.

SBP
  * How easy is it to modify the existing annotea tools to simply
  generate EARL, as it is, straight up?

CMN Errr, quite hard really. It is probably easier to modify tools which
would produce EARL to post the EARL as an annotation (as one option)

SBP
  * 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.

CMN True. We should talk to folks who are identifying other RDF stuff, in
general. I have also talked a little to the annotea folks about identifying
EARL within an annotation, which is a seperate problem to do with the
internal workings of their schema.

SBP
  * 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.

CMN Me too, but that is a problem we should sort out with the annotea folks

SBP
  * Can't annotations be stored as XLinks?

CMN They are ore or less a subset of Xlinks, and I believe can be transferred
to be Xlinks, if you have a mechanism for storing Xlinks. But I am not
certain.
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2001 08:22:57 GMT

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