Re: Annotea's context property

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Lunedì, 10 Mar 2003, alle 16:51 Europe/Paris, Charles McCathieNevile ha 
scritto:

> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Brent Hendricks wrote:
>
>> Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>
>>> For example I might want to claim that the creator of  document is
>>>   <foaf:Person> <foaf:mbox> <mailto:charles@sidar.org> .
>>> i.e. the person who has the email address charles@sidar.org, 
>>> expressed in
>>> a way that can be processed by RDF and matched less ambiguously than 
>>> just a
>>> literal. This is legal according to my reading of the schemas.
>>
>> It may be legal, but I'm not convinced that it's a good idea.  If you
>> create an annotation with some arbitrary RDF resource(s) as the value 
>> of
>> dc:creator, there will be several Annotea clients that won't know what
>> to do with it.
>
> In theory this means they are not correctly implementing what is 
> specified -
> in general there is no reason in RDF not to do this.
Not sure if I understand you right, if a resource is accepted as 
author, this mean that this resource can be of any type, even those 
that will be defined in future. How could a client possibly implement 
the protocol correctly? (Telling the user "you need a plugin to support 
visualisation of http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" ?)
> (...)It would be
> good to know which annotea clients can or can't handle this kind of 
> thing
> (and servers for that matter).
Maybe it would be a useful extension of the protocol if clients could 
tell the server which rdf-schemas they support (similarly ore as a 
enhancement to the "accept" header in http), a smart server would then 
accept and store  foaf:Person resource as author and deliver a literal 
to a client that does not indicate to know about foaf. What do you 
think?

cheers,

reto

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (Darwin)

iD8DBQE+biVSD1pReGFYfq4RAlSkAKCQzlL1IOt3MfNBMvvBo/IZew1gXQCgpOQ8
84gHGeZubNXuSBAPcqIpfsg=
=x1NL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----