[web-annotation] MIME Type for Annotation Model

shepazu has just created a new issue for 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation:

== MIME Type for Annotation Model ==
Should we have a dedicated MIME type (media type) for an annotation? 
Or should we just use a generic JSON-LD media type? And if there is a 
dedicated MIME type, should we define a file extension for an 
annotation (or collection of annotations), such as `.anno`?

Here are some pros and cons for consideration. Please add additional 
pros and cons.

## Specific MIME Type
### Pros:
* annotation client immediately knows that the content is meant to be 
handled as an annotation, especially for UAs that handle multiple 
media types (e.g. browsers)
* allows for user registration of preferred annotation handler 
(especially for locally-created or downloaded annotations, if there's 
a file extension)
* may foster ecosystem of "annotation handlers", with annotations as 
first-class type on Web and desktops

### Cons: 
* Possibly not recognizable as JSON-LD from MIME type alone, for 
generic JSON-LD processors
** (…but could be negotiated to be sent with JSON-LD MIME type, 
right?)

## Generic JSON MIME Type
### Pros:
* Immediately recognizable as JSON-LD from MIME type alone, for 
generic JSON-LD processors

### Cons: 
* doesn't identify annotations as unique from other JSON-LD content

## Proposals
There are 3 likely proposals for a MIME type:
1. Generic JSON-LD: `application/ld+json`
2. Annotation-only: `application/anno` (and `.anno`)
3. Possible JSON-LD and annotation: `application/ld+json+anno` (and 
`.anno`)

Option 3 might be processable by JSON-LD processors, but it is long 
and clumsy; and it only applies to the JSON serialization (which might
 be okay).

Thoughts?

Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/125 using your GitHub 
account

Received on Wednesday, 16 December 2015 17:29:32 UTC