W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > July 2015

Re: [web-annotation] "Open" or "Web" Annotation

From: Jacob Jett <jgjett@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 08:52:17 -0500
Message-ID: <CABzPtBKHQkR2yOZ4U+jYikevV+evAcp6YSygDA+htjYk-J1TyA@mail.gmail.com>
To: TB Dinesh <dinesh@servelots.com>
Cc: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>, Web Annotation <public-annotation@w3.org>
+1

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 6:30 AM, TB Dinesh <dinesh@servelots.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
> wrote:
> > There have already been discussions that may lead to (minor, but
> > nevertheless existing) changes in spec. On the other hand, the WG's
> > document has no official trace back to the OADM, and this may lead to
> > confusion. Consequently, changing the name of the document seems to be
> >  a cleaner way forward.
> >
> > I am sensitive to the namespace issue but, in fact, the same issue
> > applies. The namespace may change (maybe some domain or range
> > specifications will change, for example), so having a new namespace
> > set at the beginning of the work is a small investment that may pay
> > off in the future. RDF based implementations can simply change a URI
> > in the namespace declaration, nobody forces them to change the prefix,
> >  ie, it does not seem to be a hugely expensive move (though indeed a
> > pain).
> >
> > Bottom line: I am in favour of the change, even if I realize it is not
> >  an obvious move.
> >
> > --
> > GitHub Notif of comment by iherman
> > See
> > https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/46#issuecomment-118272210
> >
>
>
Received on Friday, 3 July 2015 13:53:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:37 UTC