- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 12:31:19 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
I say -1 to drop to `SpecificResource` - unless we are going for *always* having it as the object of `hasBody` / `hasTarget` (e.g. SpecificResource or equivalent specified as their `rdfs:range`). Why? Because SpecificResource is a placeholder - and so this should be prominently marked beyond just a `oa:hasSource`. Where's the issue suggesting this change to `hasBody` and `hasTarget`? It would be incompatible with earlier OA model - which should be part of the consideration. How would `oa:Choice` etc. be used? Subclassing (whatever replaces) SpecificResource? -- GitHub Notif of comment by stain See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/67#issuecomment-134174001
Received on Monday, 24 August 2015 12:31:21 UTC