W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-annotation@w3.org > January to June 2002

RE: [FYI] More annotation support in the latest Amaya release

From: Marja-Riitta Koivunen <marja@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 19:35:30 -0500
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020109192540.02ef95b8@localhost>
To: "Barstow Art (NMP/Boston)" <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>, "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>, "'ext Matthew Wilson'" <matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk>
Cc: <www-annotation@w3.org>
You are right I should have tested Annotea Servlet too.
After EricP's quick fix it seems to work now - thanks Eric!

Marja

At 05:16 PM 1/9/2002 -0500, Barstow Art (NMP/Boston) wrote:
> > From: ext Marja-Riitta Koivunen [mailto:marja@w3.org]
>
> > The thread schema was not supposed to affect old clients, I
> > did test with
> > old Amaya. But obviously that was not enough. We should have
> > asked someone
> > else to test too. I have two names now on my list that we can
> > ask next time.
>
>Marja - you should/could test schema or protocol changes with the
>Annotea JavaScript interfaces:
>
>  [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/Annotea/Bookmarklet/Annotea-JavaScript.html
>
> > Meanwhile we try see what is wrong and correct it as soon as possible.
>
>Hmmm.  The Annotea Servlet?
>
>Jim - does your Annotea implementation use an Annotea Servlet like
>[1] does or does it go directly to an Annotea Server?
>
>Matthew - at one point EricP was talking about modifying the Annotea
>server (protocol?) so that Annozilla could bypass the Annotea Servlet
>and go directly to the server.  I don't know the status of that work.
>I believe the issue was that Mozilla was expecting a different MIME
>media
>type for the RDF/XML returned from the server.  Even if this current
>problem is not related to the Annotea Servlet perhaps you and EricP
>can determine a way to eliminate the servlet from the pipeline.
>
>Art
>---
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2002 19:36:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Friday, 25 March 2005 11:19:17 GMT