- From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 06:43:09 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
I must admit I am not sure I understand all that. If that is the
direction we'd go, that means that an annotation client has to
implement loads of extra things to ensure that it works with the
server as expected. This pushes the load to the client side, which is
not what we want.
*If*, somehow, the client identifies a server to be an annotation
server and not just a server in the wild, then it should rely on the
restrictions described in 4.1.1. A Rob put it, what is, otherwise, the
sense of the whole specification?
There is an 'if', of course, namely how does the client know that a
server is not just a lambda HTTP server, but one that abides to the
rules (restrictions:-) of the Annotation Protocol. I am not sure there
is a way in the document at this moment.
Ivan
> On 07 Jul 2015, at 23:10 , Erik Wilde <notifications@github.com>
wrote:
>
> without having read the whole document, here are two starting
points:
>
> • remove all of 4.1.1 ("use HTTP as the application protocol")
> • if you want to make recommendations for implementations,
move them to an informative appendix or a separate document. i may
have time for a more complete review, but i think that only makes
sense if there is some alignment in terms of the general approach
being taken.
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
>
----
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
--
GitHub Notif of comment by iherman
See
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/51#issuecomment-119458094
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2015 06:43:11 UTC