W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > November 2015

Re: [web-annotation] Clarify ability to reason with annotations - note additional statements to add to reasoner

From: BigBlueHat via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 21:15:20 +0000
To: public-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-153867567-1446671719-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@tilgovi that route got rejected (iirc) due to it *having* to be 
overly specific and exclusive.

Here are the examples that match (more or less) what you're 
describing:
 - 
https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Expressing_Role_in_Multi-Body_Annotations#Role_as_Subproperty_of_hasBody.2FhasTarget
 - 
https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Expressing_Role_in_Multi-Body_Annotations#Role_as_Subproperty
 - 
https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Expressing_Role_in_Multi-Body_Annotations#Role_as_Subproperty_2

Doing things like "looping through the bodies" for output or even 
keeping up with a limitless number of possible relationships between 
body and target which MAY be considered "annotations" (but are likely 
more accurately RDF-style resource *description*) becomes unwieldy 
quickly...

-- 
GitHub Notif of comment by BigBlueHat
See 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/98#issuecomment-153867567
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2015 21:15:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:42 UTC