Re: [web-annotation] How do we model "groups" in the Annotation model?

A Group may be the agent that creates an annotation. As has been 
discussed Groups can have a role in authorization and access control 
(which in my mind is quite distinct from audience role). And of course
 a Group may be the target audience of an annotation. Clearly Groups 
are complex and in the annotation ecosystem will play more roles than 
just that of audience. Since we are primarily concerned with 
annotations, not groups, I think it best to avoid as much as possible 
the temptation of offering our own new ontology for describing Groups 
in common roles (audience, author, access control). Such semantics 
(mostly at least) exist. When modeling annotations it seems better to 
point to existing semantics adequate for describing a Group in the 
context of a particular annotation.

The schema.org audience property and Audience class is generally 
adequate as is to describe a Group as the audience of an annotation, 
allowing annotation authors to point to a further description of a 
Group when needed, and as necessary allows communities to offer their 
own extended models of audience-related attributes of a Group. Using 
schema.org annotation agents can name the Group that is the target of 
an annotation (schema:audienceType), and for certain existing 
sub-types of Audience (e.g., PeopleAudience), annotation agents can 
provide additional audience-relevant attributes of the Group, e.g., 
gender, min. age, max age. And of course through schema:url, 
schema:sameAs, additional rdfa typeOf, annotation creators can link to
 further information about a Group relevant to its other 
(non-audience) roles in the annotation ecosystem.  

So I would agree that this issue is orthogonal to #8. 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by tcole3
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/119#issuecomment-161762006
 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 3 December 2015 19:48:20 UTC