- From: Jacob via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 19:49:01 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
+1 from me to only relax the dctypes to a MAY. Having reread section 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 more carefully, it's clear that points about how dctypes:Class and dc:format can be exploited are a bit backwards. Typically we are going to want look for format first if available and then fall back to dctype if that format is an opaque document format (like html) for the kind of rendering that 3.2.2 is suggesting. I suggest that the language regarding applications determining and rendering resources be moved to 3.2.3 and new text describing dctypes as the backup plan for rendering resources be added. We should leave a note that at the developer's preference it can be used as a shortcut for determining how to render certain kinds of resources exactly as currently described. I further suggest swapping locations of 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 so that body and target metadata is discussed first and body and target classes (I think we mean the type of content they contain but possibly we mean to repeat their type of format) is discussed second. With regards to UI/UX I was imagining both the scenario that is already described (client is given a dctypes:Image resource and knows to wrap it in an <img> element with the appropriate src attribute) and also scenarios where dctypes:Image is leveraged by an annotation system's IR feature to retrieve at the user's request, all of the annotations targeting images or all of the annotations that annotate something with images or all of the annotations that have images as a part of them. Regards, Jacob _____________________________________________________ Jacob Jett Research Assistant Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship The Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA (217) 244-2164 jjett2@illinois.edu On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:43 PM, BigBlueHat <notifications@github.com> wrote: > The Web doesn't have a feature called "file extension." [image: :smile:] > http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html#opaque > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.w3.org_DesignIssues_Axioms.html-23opaque&d=AwMCaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=npggDwlZ6PziBzPBZthSo0f8iGOgRMf9ulO6o4WwfiA&m=1Et1o-_suH0El1hnBkw_NQ3NSPp6U2P_sJeL2fnbjU0&s=RQ6lkys2lDeDwEVfctqYPQ_i-_1UCLA1K4JHtcV0-Jo&e=> > > What's the media type of http://github.com/ > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_&d=AwMCaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=npggDwlZ6PziBzPBZthSo0f8iGOgRMf9ulO6o4WwfiA&m=1Et1o-_suH0El1hnBkw_NQ3NSPp6U2P_sJeL2fnbjU0&s=zmpi1_veV4LbJk93BEMoTnLEm9dRRlsZudC2fY6SX58&e=> > or https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_mozilla_pdf.js&d=AwMCaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=npggDwlZ6PziBzPBZthSo0f8iGOgRMf9ulO6o4WwfiA&m=1Et1o-_suH0El1hnBkw_NQ3NSPp6U2P_sJeL2fnbjU0&s=NxPPNytTLAGDYtq8mBit2-L4v9ELOL3tPXAesN6wR0o&e=> > ? > > Regardless, I think we need to narrow in on some use cases for both > dctypes and format. My preference would be to keep them both, lower them > from SHOULD to MAY, and go from there. > > Would that put this issue to rest? If not, what's needed to help close the > loop? > > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_w3c_web-2Dannotation_issues_67-23issuecomment-2D135519014&d=AwMCaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=npggDwlZ6PziBzPBZthSo0f8iGOgRMf9ulO6o4WwfiA&m=1Et1o-_suH0El1hnBkw_NQ3NSPp6U2P_sJeL2fnbjU0&s=cdq-MQwzRtPjDDAq0MTuH4RDabDfmkzcb12yAjydqN0&e=> > . > -- GitHub Notif of comment by jjett See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/67#issuecomment-135534059
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2015 19:49:04 UTC