- From: BigBlueHat via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 14:26:13 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
@elf-pavlik good points, and very good question for re-framing the discussion! It's sort of what I was after when I was referring to Pages "merely" as Collections with some siblings and a position among them--such that "next" and "previous" could be used for finding the related siblings. In [LDP paging](http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp-paging/) the relationships are a bit clearer (maybe). In that case, a "page" has a greater than / less than relationship with other pages, but the items within it do not themselves have order--as `contains` is unordered. Instead, you're supposed to provide additional ordering constructs specific to you're domain: > It is up to the domain model and server to determine the appropriate predicate to indicate the resource’s order within a page (or globally), and up to the client receiving this representation to use that order in whatever way is appropriate to meet its needs, for example to sort the data prior to presentation on a user interface. [✍](https://hypothes.is/a/N4XA4D0gTBWDywkD6h9niQ) @azaroth42 iirc, there was some reason we felt that non-in-page ordering done this way was insufficient and that knowing that position of the annotation within the wider collection--without the provision of additional statements was important...but I don't honestly recall what that was now. Maybe you do? :smile: Schema.org also lacks the notion of "pages" per se, and instead uses `ItemList` in which a `ListItem` can reference a `next` and `previous` sibling as well as it's `position` within the list--such that you could build a list of lists. :turtle:'s all the way down. :smile_cat: -- GitHub Notif of comment by BigBlueHat See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/50#issuecomment-153370510
Received on Tuesday, 3 November 2015 14:26:15 UTC