W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > August 2015

RE: Roles, multiple bodies, and creating wiki page of potential solution

From: Cole, Timothy W <t-cole3@illinois.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:11:38 +0000
To: "'Frederick Hirsch'" <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
CC: "'W3C Public Annotation List'" <public-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EECC28A63F2ED74B8420079BBE59945339065656@CITESMBX6.ad.uillinois.edu>
One more semantically valid approach to raise as a compromise possibility for the multi-body / role issue. We currently allow this:

"body": "paris"

If you want to identify "paris" as a tag, then you clearly have to say a little more. We currently tell you to do this:

  "body": { "type": ["Tag", "EmbeddedContent"],"value": "paris"}


How unnatural is this to plain JSON developers?


If it is acceptable, then I would propose extending this approach to do this:

  "body": { "type": ["Comment", "EmbeddedContent"],"value": "paris"}

(where Comment can be replaced by versions of our motivation vocabulary...)

-Tim Cole

________________________________________
From: Cole, Timothy W
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 17:03
To: 'Frederick Hirsch'
Cc: 'W3C Public Annotation List'
Subject: RE: Roles, multiple bodies, and creating wiki page of potential solution

For those who might be interested, I did create a wiki page illustrating most of the proposed ways so far raised to describe (and thereby differentiate) the non-multiplicity roles played by individual Bodies / Targets included in a multi-Body / Target Annotation:

  https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Expressing_Role_in_Multi-Body_Annotations

I created 2 multi-body annotations and 1 multi-target annotation as examples (scenarios), and then created serializations in both JSON and Turtle illustrating the various approaches. The annotations created lack required annotation provenance, but otherwise include (I think) all of the MUST and SHOULD triples required by our data model.  The multi-target scenario is a bit of a stretch -- I suspect either we don't need to worry about multi-Target use cases or we need to revise and maybe augment our current list of Motivation terms to better handle multi-Target use cases.

The first example includes 3 bodies: a Textual Body, a SemanticTag Body, and a SpecificResource derived from a YouTube Video.

The second example has 2 Textual Bodies, and the third example has 2 Web page Targets.

The approaches illustrated have mostly been discussed on the list, except for the last approach which would type Bodies and Targets according to their role in the Annotation (which will likely make Rob cringe a little).

Anyway, may be helpful for our discussion Wednesday and beyond in case you find the email links Fredrick provide not quite enough.

Rob, Fredrick, since this page is transient, I did not try to link from the WG Wiki's home page.  Feel free if you think that useful.

Thanks,

Tim Cole
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2015 16:14:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:39 UTC