- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 18:20:44 +0200
- To: W3C Public Annotation List <public-annotation@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <CE6CADF5-D08E-4434-A3EF-12CF1AC8ADA1@w3.org>
Meeting minutes are here:
http://www.w3.org/2015/04/29-annotation-minutes.html
Text version below
Ivan
----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
29 Apr 2015
[2]Agenda
[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Apr/0136.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/29-annotation-irc
Attendees
Present
Rob Sanderson (azaroth), Tim Cole (TimCole), Frederick
Hirsch (fjh), Matt Haas (Matt_Haas), Ivan Herman (Ivan),
Dave Cramer (dauwhe), Kyrce Swenson (Kyrce), Doug
Schepers (shepazu), Ben_De_Meester (bjdmeest), Paolo
Ciccarese (paoloC), Ray Denenberg (RayD), TB Dinesh
(tbdinesh), Dan Whaley (dwhly), Stian Soiland-Reyes
(stain), Jacon Jett (Jacob_Jett), Janina Sarol
(Janina_Sarol), Davis Salisbury
Regrets
Benjamin Young, Kristóf Csillag, Bill Kasdorf
Chair
Frederick Hirsch, Rob Sanderson
Scribe
Kyrce
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Agenda Review, Scribe Selection, Announcements
2. [6]Minutes
3. [7]Footnote Markup
4. [8]I Annotate and Hack Days
5. [9]Annotation Sets
* [10]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Meeting: Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 29 April 2015
Agenda Review, Scribe Selection, Announcements
Minutes
fjh: suggest we not approve minutes this week, wait until next
week and give people time to review them.
<fjh> [11]http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-annotation-minutes.html
[11] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-annotation-minutes.html
<fjh> F2F summary -
[12]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015
Apr/0157.html
[12] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Apr/0157.html
fjh: sent message with summary of f2f. one day meeting in
conjunction with the iAnnotate conference. Looked at LDP work
because people had gone to the LDP f2f. much relates to what we
are doing
... update regarding social web which is a solid proposal based
on LDP. then talked about client API all linked from link in
chat. Decided to proceed with what Nick had done. Lower level
js apis are appropriate rather than trying to complicate.
<fjh> nick’s message on text offsets
[13]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015
Apr/0158.html
[13] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Apr/0158.html
fjh: publishing: markup is best. RangeFinder API had some
questions. Lots of algorithm choices doesn't necessarily help.
Overall- check the minutes, all of this is there.
<fjh> I Annotate, see
[14]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ML3u4hmCF2oeIFNG3To4L1N
BjqWnYQ37vYJ5Y2eLUdY/view
[14] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ML3u4hmCF2oeIFNG3To4L1NBjqWnYQ37vYJ5Y2eLUdY/view
fjh: iAnnotate. A lot of good stuff. There is a page with a
summary.
<TimCole>
[15]https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/dpub.html#footnote
[15] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/dpub.html#footnote
Footnote Markup
TimCole: so regarding the footnote issue. there was a call on
Monday. as per HTML working group, holding off on footnote
pending accessibility. Ancillary attributes and elements. We
may want to look at that and the proposed area draft. Draft was
published around April 20. This is current thinking.
<TimCole> raised potential footnote element in HTML during DPub
IG call.
<TimCole> the sense is that adding this element to HTML is on
hold (for various reasons)
<TimCole> one of them being that footnote is a role in WAI-ARIA
and both DPub and HTML want to see what happens with that
<TimCole> we may want to look at how this is proposed for
implementation in the Digital Publishing WAI-ARIA Module April
20 draft
<fjh> ivan: fundamental discussions between formatting &
prototocols wg and digital publishing community
Ivan: referring back to the ARIA reference. Discussion around
this. Cannot say when document will move on and how. No
technical details here at the moment. We should not rely on it
for this working group.
<Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to ask about ideas on the way
forward
Azaroth: Ways forward with HTML based for innovations. Should
we try to work with the ARIA group and get a role attribute
value defined rather than going up to HTML level. or
microformats or what
<dauwhe> Hixie on footnotes in HTML:
[16]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/
2008Apr/0198.html
[16] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2008Apr/0198.html
Ivan: So does come back to the discussion we had with
publishing community. The publishing community has had the
notion of structural semantics. They need a way to implement.
That's something that community needs. Close to a hundred
different notions for the educational market
... The current work roles to use the ARIA role…. should role
attribute only be used for accessibility? or for something
larger (eg structurual semantics). If we don't use it then they
have to define something new. If this happens, the notions that
the digital publishing groups may work for these as well as Rob
said. But I have no idea what direction they will take. We
should wait.
... Driven by accessibility not by browser vendors exclusively.
All together.
<paoloC>
[17]http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/RDFa
[17] http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/RDFa
paoloC: I don't know about accessibility. We have been
experimenting with RDFa. It's not easy. It's a bit ugly at
times. Worked with Ivan. Not knowing what is going on in the
next six months with other groups, we should keep on top of
RDFa and the microdata—and how it can be formalized. Also a
backup no matter what happens in other groups. Why not have
this also?
<azaroth> +1 to Paolo ; remaining informed and keeping options
open is good
<shepazu> suggest concrete ways in which <note> would differ
from <aside>, describe functional mechanisms rather than just
markup (such as accessibility and navigation), review all
decisions about aside and footnotes, make sure to coordinate
with WAI and with CSS WG about rendering
<fjh> +1 to paolo
<Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to ask about accessibility of
annotations in aria
azaroth: Ivan i wanted to ask about the accessibility issue.
Client displays annotations in the sidebar. How does a screen
reader handle this?
Ivan: Very similar to the other cases that we have right now in
pub and accessibility group. I think the answer is: similar to
HTML. Requirements can be handled by ARIA. Introducing a
separate value should not be allowed. From accessibility POV
there is no difference. Fundamental questions about the role of
the attribute. Is it just for accessiiblity? or is it for other
kind of "semantics" There are two different views.
... ARIA role as a much more general feature for accessibility
for adding semantics to HTML code. People use classes for,
which can clash.
I"m not sure of the direction.
Role is not special behavior. Role as a signal to user agents,
usually screen readers that they should pay attention, not to
do something specific. Role is not the way to go for behavior.
<tbdinesh> +1 to shepazu (although annotator role might make
sense)
fjh: markup should be specific to navigation. Can you explain
what you meant by being able to "act"
shepazu: obvious example is hyperlink. nav element doesn't do
anything just says that this is navigation. Similarly section,
article. Details does something. a couple of different types of
behavior. examples: wikipedia. when you mouseover a footnote,
it pops up a tooltip.
... one footnote and three references to that footnote. If you
navigate from the second reference. it has a state and
navigates back.
... note element: if you have referenced a news article (A). I
write a blog post about it (B). Block quote from article A and
talk in context about it in blob B. Another person comes and
wants to talk about it in C. It would be powerful if the
reference can be linked to both article A and to the blog B.
More unification, less fracturing.
... make that blockquote an annotation. user agent could store
it as both.
... sounds abstract but is a powerful feature that is different
than HTML. Must be worked on before it's truly compelling.
fjh: very helpful. Suggested that footnotes are useful and
dynamic results
paoloC: mixing up a lot of different concerns. makes argument
abstract. I heard a lot of different things and applications.
All different topics and complicated.
<fjh> agree with paolo, we need to review and focus discussion
subsequently
shepazu: for keeping scope. stick with first two examples -
navigation to and from a footnote; rendering of footnote in
CSS.
... an aside is unstructured. it's whatever you want. A
footnote or note, as an annotation, has some structural pieces.
maybe that's how to present it.
fjh: think about it and review it and focus the discussion.
Because as paoloC said, I'm also confused.
paoloC: specify what is the model part and what is the behavior
part, no matter what methodology we want to adopt. good to
clarify given what we want to achieve what are the different
parts that we would want to define.
<Jacob_> +1 to Paolo
Ivan: I haven't talked to Mike so I do not know what he
expects.
... I don't think I can do this. It's not clear enough to me.
fjh: share on list. Think about what has been said.
I Annotate and Hack Days
shepazu: a lot of really great demos during the hack days.
Dinesh showed a lot of the cool stuff he's been working on.
... i found the demos and the variety interesting.
dwhly: thanks to all who came to either or both events. No real
updates. We will be sending out a post-workshop summary today.
The key is a survey which is long overdue. Please help by
filling it out. We want to try to understand how to evolve the
design to other formats or even more traditional formats. Lots
of anecdotal feedback.
<tbdinesh> +1 thanks dwhly
Annotation Sets
<fjh> much thanks to dwhyl and hypothes.is for I Annotate,
excellent hosting for Web Annotation F2F
azaroth: Came up under protocol conversation. If an annotation
contains other annotations how does that work with search, etc.
We do not have any support from the use case or modeling level.
... Strong desire to have the capability to create a set or to
add to a set. Focus on gathering ideas and use cases and
requirements for this topic. Introduce some use cases or ideas
now. How might you use lists of annotations? Brainstorm now;
modeling in future call.
<Jacob_> This seems more like a case for collections and a
collection-specific model than something that needs to be
handled specifically inside of the annotation model...
<RayD> Question: what's the difference between set and
container?
paoloC: I repeat my use cases from f2f: We use them. Slice and
Dice according to criteria. Access restriction and tasks.
People read documents with specific goals in mind, particular
compound, etc.
... They annotate these documents and pull them and create a
report. They read the same documents with different goals.
Don't want to mix up annotations for different goals. Different
sets according to tasks. They can also be access controlled,
share with one person, group, multiple people. !. task
oriented; 2. restricted. many requests to have same annotation
in multiple sets. This causes problems.
... minimum amount of properties or data attached. If I want to
be really structured, attatch structured data as well.
... name title description should be enough.
<Jacob_> This feels out-of-scope.
paoloC: containers seems a little bit generic and not very
qualified. Not sure if it matters.
<RayD> thanks!
<Jacob_> This problem is not specific to annotations
azaroth: difference between annotation sets and containers.
Membership vs. identity issues.
<paoloC> :) I would probably exclude the same track multiple
times in the same playlist from the metaphor
azaroth: same track multiple times, or tracks from different
albums in same playlists, or you can have the same tracks in
different playlists. Creation different than playlists.
<Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to add EPUB UC
azaroth: We can only answer out of scope when we look at the
use cases. Different methods of describing sets we can treat it
as out of scope. With search, we are going to end up with lists
of annotation in some format. So it would be in scope for the
working group
... to add a use case; in the work that we did with the idpf to
define annotations for ePub. There was a need for annotations
for individual epubs so that you could distribute them and have
them show up on your reader. Third-party annotations for sale
or for free to be added. Like: author notes, teacher notes,
cliff notes, summaries, etc. etc.
... without sets, you would have to distribute each annotation
(and charge for each) individually.
shepazu: use case and solution from f2f: when asked, shepazu
said no. he felt that chained annotations satisfied their use
case. See the use case for sets in the protocol that paoloC
referred to. Not sure if it's part of the data model. Or even
if that is what is being suggested.
azaroth: no that is what we are talking about. That there
should be a construct for sets of annotations in the data
model. Readers don't need to implement multiple ways of
grouping annotations.
<stain> [18]http://www.researchobject.org/
[18] http://www.researchobject.org/
<Zakim> stain, you wanted to relate annotation sets to ORE and
researchobject.org
stain: when we were developing the research object model (group
of docs, presentations with annotations). Strong need to have a
unit for a group of annotations because they have a purpose.
Who made this collection? Who is talking about this resource or
set of resources?
<azaroth> +1 to Stain
<Jacob_> The thing is, the set model is not dependent upon the
contents of the set all being annotations or even if any of
them are annotations at all. We might look around and see if
there are not, in fact, models that already do this work. ORE,
EDM, Schema all come to mind.
stain: you have the containers but you don't have a way of
accessing it without the protocol. It should be lightweight.
The aggregation itself has a value. you can give it a title, a
purpose.
<davis_salisbury> +1 to stain
<stain> we also used OA annotations in our Research Object
bundle: [19]https://w3id.org/bundle/#manifest-annotations
[19] https://w3id.org/bundle/#manifest-annotations
paoloC: I've been struggling with Annotation sets for a long
time. Some clients know how to handle annotation sets. Some
don't. I think having a protocol and model, if lightweight
would help implementations.
... it's complicated and you don't know what the client
understands. In the case of sets it becomes complicated. Hard
to implement graceful degradation.
<fjh> thank you Kyrce for scribing, thanks
<fjh> thanks everyone
<ivan> trackbot, end telcon
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [20]scribe.perl version
1.140 ([21]CVS log)
$Date: 2015/04/29 16:10:58 $
[20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2015 16:20:53 UTC