- From: BigBlueHat via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 21:09:06 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
BigBlueHat has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation: == Do we need an `annotates` relationship for use in RDF and/or Link Relationships? == We can currently express relationships (even vague ones) within an Annotation (see https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/98#issuecomment-153831097 ). However, we still do not have (for better or worse) the ability to state `body annotates target`. We have instead `annotation hasBody body; annotation hasTarget target`. Should we define an `annotates` relationship? Or (perhaps) a link relationship that could be used with either an annotation or a body? ```http GET /blog-post/comment-1 ``` ```http HTTP/1.1 200 OK Link: </blog-post>; rel="annotates" ``` That scenario done now would look like: ```http GET /blog-post/comment-1 ``` ```http HTTP/1.1 200 OK Link: </blog-post>; rel="http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#hasTarget" ``` Obviously, if we specified `annotates` in the [link relation registry](http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml), we'd also (likely) want to specify the reverse relationship for us in the more common scenario of linking from a blog post to any known comments. Here are the existing link relationship values that come pretty close (but are more specific): - [bookmark](http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/links.html#link-type-bookmark) -- specific to bookmarking - [describes](http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6892) -- description only - [describedby](http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-powder-dr-20090901/#semlink) -- same as above; just points the other way - [replies](http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4685#section-4) -- would only work for a direct reply and...historically (though not part of the registry...yet?) - [annotation](http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iiir-html-00) -- ...you'll have to search for it...[or see it highlighted](https://via.hypothes.is/tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iiir-html-00) See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/101
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2015 21:09:08 UTC