Re: public-annotation@w3.org

Hi Antoine,

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:

> This is about semantic tags, in the case one tags an object with a (SKOS)
> concept: the current solution [1] presents a form of indirection. I.e. the
> body of the annotation is now a blank node that refer to a resource (the
> concept), with a skos:related links between both. In the former Open
> Annotation spec [2], the body was directly the concept itself.
>
> I have two questions:
> - why the indirection? The OA pattern was simpler, and quite matching the
> intention of semantic tagging. when one tags, one doesn't create a new
> concept.
>

The reasoning was that we didn't want to add a class (oa:SemanticTag) to
any arbitrary non-information resource on the semantic web just because it
was currently being used in that role for the annotation.  Eventually all
resources would have the class and it would be worthless.  So the
indirection is to solve that problem.



> - why skos:related? Given the sort of semantic tagging scenarios we (and I
> believe anyone else) have, the link is much stronger from a semantic
> perspective. I'd have expected skos:exactMatch.
>

A good question, and one that I don't find the answer to immediately.  I
think that exactMatch could be used instead of related, which does seem a
much weaker statement.  The intended semantics of the relationship are
similar to that of foaf:page, but instead the object is the concept
directly.  Happy to go with your opinion on which predicate makes most
sense there!

Rob

-- 
Rob Sanderson
Information Standards Advocate
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305