RE: [model] Proposal: Allow motivatedBy on SpecificResource

To be clear, you are not (I hope) suggesting doing away with multiple bodies when within oa:Choice, oa:Composite or oa:List.  Section 5 of the model, e.g., Figure 28. 

 

The use cases that inspired these constructs – e.g., the same comment in multiple languages or in multiple formats – do not suffer from the mixed motivation issue. Have their own issues, but I feel like we’ve mostly dealt with these.

 

-Tim Cole

 

From: jgjett@gmail.com [mailto:jgjett@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jacob Jett
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 11:21 AM
To: Robert Sanderson
Cc: Web Annotation
Subject: Re: [model] Proposal: Allow motivatedBy on SpecificResource

 

+1 for multiple annotations in the tag(s) + comment and edit + comment cases.

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________

Jacob Jett
Research Assistant
Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship
The Graduate School of Library and Information Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA
(217) 244-2164
jjett2@illinois.edu <mailto:jjett2@illinois.edu> 

 

 

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com <mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

Tim, all,

 

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Timothy Cole <t-cole3@illinois.edu <mailto:t-cole3@illinois.edu> > wrote:

In my mind, allowing body-level motivations, at least for the use cases so far proposed, is simply a way to conflate what should be separate annotation graphs. 

 

 

For example, should the protocol have a way of allowing posting of multiple (related or chained) annotations in a single transaction? (Does it already?) 

 

It does not.  LDP does not have a notion of transactions at all.  And (as you know) we don't have a notion of sets/lists of annotations beyond the unordered containership.

 

Anyway, I don’t want to flog a dead horse, but since Doug asked directly about slippery slopes, I did want to elaborate on the trouble we might get ourselves into if we allow multiple bodies that relate to multiple targets and to each other in substantively different ways.  I still do think there is a slippery slope potential here.

 

This seems like a good opportunity to re-evaluate multiple bodies as a feature at all.  To my knowledge, all multiple body use cases have been for different motivations.  Most frequently it has been comment plus tags that are all really about the same target.  If we went to a multiple annotation model for edit + comment, we could more reliably also go to a multiple annotation model for tag(s) + comment as well.  Then the individual annotations could be addressed individually, for example to moderate a tag without at the same time moderating the comment, or vice versa.

 

Rob

 

-- 

Rob Sanderson

Information Standards Advocate

Digital Library Systems and Services

Stanford, CA 94305