Re: annotation protocol

Thanks Ben :)

> By "protocol", I mean:  any network interaction between systems
> (deliverable
> > 4).
> The first part of this list should be out of scope for us--it's the
> domain of content systems the Web over.
>

Let me clarify further ...

1. We need to generate a set of use cases that should be solved by network
interactions towards the deliverable currently known as annotation-protocol.
2. From those use cases we then need to generate a set of requirements.
3. We would then compare the requirements against existing standards, or
upcoming standards that we can influence, to determine their coverage and
appropriateness.
4.  We would very likely determine at this point that HTTP verbs fit the
bill entirely for features 1-4 :)

However, there's always extras on top of the basics.  For example, the
Linked Data Platform API specifies a bunch of additional features on top of
POST/PUT/DELETE/GET + PATCH, and we should thus consider whether we simply
say "Use HTTP" or "Use LDP" or "Use HTTP/LDP in this particular way".


The following list is where we can bring something truly valuable to
> the Web (or find it and make it even better). These also relate more
> closely to our data model and it's representations and where things
> like Linked Data Profile (LDP) could play a roll--if folks choose the
> turtle representation.
>

If you mean LDP as Linked Data Platform... http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/ ...
I'll note (as a member of that WG) that we also now require JSON-LD in
clause 4.3.2.3 :)


>   * Client searching for matching annotations
> >   * Client browsing annotations
> >   * Server notifying client, or another server, that an annotation was
> > created/updated/deleted/retrieved
> >   * Server A synchronizing annotations from Server B
>

Inserting that the above is true here, but the outcome is much less obvious.


> I have a personal interest in this stack of "edges" of the annotating
> experience and space, and would love to contribute in exploring them.
> I'm also new here. :)
>

Everyone is new here (where here = the WG) :) And everyone is equal, the
only distinction between equals in terms of influencing the direction of
the work is the level of productive participation.

So what I'm hearing is that you'd like to be an editor for
annotation-protocol ... :D


> Rob, what is the best way / place to participate in developing the Use
> Cases and doing the exploration of what's needed here?
>

I think we should discuss the working methodology on the call tomorrow.

Some possibilities are:

* Create wiki pages
* github issues
* github documents
* google docs (or other) pointed to from a list in a wiki/doc/whatever
* email to the list, transcribed to one of the above
* other?

Also the form of the use cases, who will work on collecting them,
distilling them to requirements and so on :)

Rob