Re: Comments on Annotea server and protocol

At 11:51 AM 8/29/2003 -0400, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > - is there any reason why this is not published as a Team submission?
> > The annotea system really deserves as much visibility as possible, I
> > think :)
>

I guess it is definetely taking too long by looking the answer :-)

>... nothing more concrete than that. I'll bring that up, too.
>
> > 1. http://www.w3.org/2002/12/AnnoteaProtocol-20021219

We have been planning to do a Note about the first protocol doc version for 
a long time (and as names changed it would be now a team submission). It is 
high in our priority list right now.

The last thing we need is feedback from you and other Annotea developers on 
the last questions we have marked in the document. Maybe I should send one 
question at a time to the list and negotiate what to do. And double check 
possible earlier comments.

We did think carefully about the wordings but, if you can give me exact 
places where you would prefer that we use stronger keywords that would be 
helpful. Often it is that the protocol doc might not be the exact right 
place for the strong requirements (although some are there now), we should 
have another doc for explaining the implementations.

However, finishing what we have now would probably be a good start. We can 
then add improvements in the next versions. For instance, the finalizing 
the protocol for shared bookmarks and adding attribution information will 
be a new version.

Also if there are other comments about problems/errors/typos they are welcome.

And I would also like to extend the context schema to be able to support 
SVG outlines for images and time code for video etc. I have also heard that 
some developers have extended XPointer for addressing video and I would 
like to here from them.

Marja

Received on Friday, 29 August 2003 13:36:14 UTC