- From: Benjamin Young <bigbluehat@hypothes.is>
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:19:29 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: W3C Public Annotation List <public-annotation@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAE3H5FKL9hQ0owtvHm97h5QdhdQsh9M=UVz0C3SsTpPAGiYHbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks, Ivan. To clarify a bit, though, I see any feed format(s) as sitting along side a "protocol" definition. It MAY be used within the protocol document, but it may also be used totally on its own--in the same way AtomPub is based on Atom feed documents + read/writes semantics, etc. One of the feed options available is the "Conainers for Annotations": http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/protocol/wd/#containers-for-annotations It would need clarifying the surrounding prose to change toward those being used completely outside of the protocol, however. The hope is to clearly define a smaller part that could more quickly provide "read-side" interoperability sooner. Write-side API semantics being a bit more...argumentative. ;) Thanks again, Ivan, Benjamin On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > > > On 24 Feb 2015, at 15:24 , Benjamin Young <bigbluehat@hypothes.is> > wrote: > > > > The current LDP-based protocol propose is a full read/write API for > dealing with Open Annotation documents. > > > > I've begun to wonder if we might not also be served by having a more > minimal "feed format" similar to (or based on) RSS, Atom, or > ActivityStreams (etc). > > > > The end result should be a lightweight wrapper around Open Annotation > Data Model documents that return them as a collection. This could be done > today with Atom via <atom:link /> references and auto-generated title, > updated, etc. tags. Lorestore apparently provides these: > > http://austese.net/lorestore/docs.html#atom > > > > Is there interest in having a separate document that defines one or more > options for expressing an annotation "feed" in any of these existing > formats? or (if we must) defining a new one? > > I would certainly be interested to see that. I am all for simplicity, so > if we find an approach that is (even) simpler than LDP, that could just be > good. Or to prove ourselves that the complexity level of LDP is the right > one. > > Ivan > > > > > Thanks for the consideration, > > Benjamin > > -- > > Developer Advocate > > http://hypothes.is/ > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C > Digital Publishing Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2015 15:19:58 UTC