- From: Jacob via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:07:03 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
+1 for this. I agree that it will be hard to enforce, which makes me think its within the boundaries of best practice rather than something the data model can outright forbid. On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes < notifications@github.com> wrote: > I think it becomes a difficult thing to enforce or check. What might at > first glance in the SVG look like non-contiguous, could be shown to be > contiguous in rendering - for instance a trianglethat is close to a circle > - you will need to do precise calculations to see if it is a contiguous > shape or not - but why should it matter? > > Perhaps the best is to simply keep it as "Multiple non-contiguous shapes > SHOULD be separate targets, this ensures that each target region gets an > identity". > > > On 8 April 2015 at 15:56, Rob Sanderson <notifications@github.com> wrote: > > > The discussion during the CG was that multiple non-contiguous shapes > > should be separate targets in the model, to avoid multiple ways of > > expressing the same thing (multiple targets) and to ensure that each > target > > region had the opportunity for identity (via the SpecificResource). > > > > If we don't feel those are important distinctions to maintain, then we > can > > drop the single shape requirement. > > > > — > > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > > <https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/17#issuecomment-90941000>. > > > > > > -- > Stian Soiland-Reyes > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 > > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/17#issuecomment-91172663>. > -- GitHub Notif of comment by jjett See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/17#issuecomment-91225926
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2015 13:07:16 UTC