Re: [web-annotation] Should Annotation concept and document be distinguished?

Hi Luc,

First of all, I hope you ate the cake you baked:-)

More seriously: just to understand the issue in somewhat more laymen's terms. The way I explain myself what you say is that the current annotation approach does not really get into the details of the 'activities', ie, does not really go into the detail on how the serialization really happened in terms of timing and in terms of process. On the other hand, PROV considers the details of this workflow as essential. Is that correct? If so, then what you propose at the end of your blog is to ensure that the serialization process is clearly separated from the act of annotation by introducing a separate oa:serializedTo property whose object will, conceptually, separate the serialized document from the annotation itself.

Model-wise or, if you like, OWL-wise I think I can follow this and it is o.k. What I do not know is how this will translate into practice. Is this something that remains on a modeling level, hidden in the guts, so to say, of the annotation model, or is this something that will appear, as extra triples, on the serialized annotation that is traveling over the wire? In other words, can we simply use the oa:serializedBy axiom using propertyChainAxiom as part of the core vocabulary specification of OA, and let those processors who are really interested by these guts use those, while being ignored by lighter weight Web Applications?

My concern is that we get into the type of modeling details that many in the group and the community will be scared by and will consider mostly unnecessary and more of a nuisance. We should find a good balance here.

Thanks!

Cheers

Ivan

> On 30 Mar 2015, at 12:56 , Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> Hi Rob, all
> 
> Here is my proposal for the mapping to PROV.
> As I thought this was a useful technique I wrote a standalone blog post about it.
> https://lucmoreau.wordpress.com/2015/03/30/provenance-recipe-mapping-shortcuts-to-prov/
> 
> Feedback welcome!
> 
> Luc
> 
> 
> On 18/02/15 22:00, Rob Sanderson via GitHub wrote:
>> @lucmoreau Could you propose a solution?
>> 
>> The options that occur to me:
>>   * Simply drop the subPropertyOf relationship to prov for
>> serializedBy/At.  This doesn't feel clean.
>>   * Split the annotation node to always refer to the concept and then
>> not require a node in the graph for the document.  So if you want to
>> give serializedBy/At you have a new node that otherwise isn't present.
>>  We could then just use the prov terms directly. This feels cleaner
>> .... but a lot more expensive when the information should be captured.
>> 
>> Also discussed on the call today was:
>>   * Drop serializedBy/At completely, but this was not viewed
>> favorably.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
> 
> --
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Head of the Web and Internet Science Group
> Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
> University of Southampton          twitter: @lucmoreau
> Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK           http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
> 
> 
> 


----
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