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

Re: Some use scenarios

From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 12:27:20 -0500
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Cc: www-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020130122720.D20065@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 08:40:53PM -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> Hi, I thought I would write up the ideas I have had recently for using
> annotea and see if these make sense and what they mean for the development...
> 
> So here are the things that occurred to me in the last few days as really
> interesting for me <grin/>
> 
> 1. There are a number of archived mailing lists at W3C. There are a number of
> cases where essentially similar discussions occur on different lists, and I
> would like to note that a thread in one archive is related to a threadd in
> another archive. So far, so good I think. But sme of these threads have
> different confidentiality levels, so I want to make sure that public things
> have annotations where people with public access find out what other public
> things are related, but where people with "private access" also get
> annotations for things that they have the ability to access.

list name:	message ids:
everyone	e1 e2 e3 e4 e5
acquaintances	a1 a2 a4 a4
friends		f1 f2 f3
closeFriends	c1 c2

bookmark:	describes:	folder:		access:
bm1		e3		insurance	world
bm2		f3		insurance	world
bm3		c2		insurance	me and Joe

Introduce Fred, my dog's vet's brother whom I met when I backed my
pickup into his Lexus. In the course of resolving damage from the
accident, I invite Fred to read messages related to insurance, which I
have smartly placed in folder of the same name.

When Fred looks for the the bookmarks of the insurance folder, he
sees some of e3, f3, c2. How do we enforce which he sees?


All annotations are visible - Fred sees bm1, bm2 and bm3:

  He knows of the existance of f3 and c3, but is unable to
  retrieve them. He can retrieve e3.

  cost: Awkward to program -
	  in order to communicate the existence of f3 and c2,
	  the server must reveal the statements
	     f3 --appearsIn--> insurance.
	     c2 --appearsIn--> insurance.
	  but none of the other statements in those bookmarks.
	  It would be unfortunate to handle this in an
	  application-specific manner rather. Therefor we will
	  need to encode these statements at a different level
	  of access from the rest of the document that asserts
	  the bookmark. This is pretty murky territory.


Bookmarks have homogeneous access - Fred sees bm1 and bm2:

  He knows of the existance of f3 but is unable to retrieve
  it. He can retrieve e3.
  cost: No auth challenge where one could help - 
	  If an unknown user queries for bookmarks in insurace,
          the server will return bm1 and bm2. If this user is
	  actually Fred, he will never get an auth prompt for
	  him to let the server know he is Fred and can know
	  about bm3.

>							      (I also want to
> point out that one thread is a continuation of another - that is intersting
> but I don't think makes a big issue).

I think this could be a separate app for applying thread properties to
web resources. This would allow a more atomic use of these predicates.
While it seems that noting thread relationships is a particular type
of bookmark or annotation, one could say that all assertions about web
resources are bookmarks or annotations. It is simpler just to make these
assertions about these resources.

I argue this point not because I think you disagree, but because it is
a trend I have noticed. We run around with our annotations hammer and
think that every RDF statements could be an annotation.

> 2. I edited a specification for a long time, and now I am handing it over. I
> want to make it clear how this thing is developed, and what are the tools
> that make the spec. Again, there are different levels of confidentiality
> involved here.
> 
> 3. I  want to annotate images with descriptions of them
> 
> 4. I want to put my bookmarks online, so I can keep finding them. Again,
> tehre are things for me only, and things that I would like to share as
> bookmarks with some information about them

I think bm3 tests this scenario.

> 5. I want to use annotations to provide EARL reports (assessments of some
> kind of conformance) for various things. It is important that these can be
> updated - is this replacing an annotation, or responding to one?

Will address in a separate thread...

-- 
-eric

(eric@w3.org)
Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2002 12:27:20 GMT

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