- From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 21:16:23 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
> On 5 Nov 2015, at 05:09, BigBlueHat <notifications@github.com> wrote: > > We can currently express relationships (even vague ones) within an Annotation (see #98 (comment) <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? > > Well… if we are in RDF land for a moment, then I do not see what this is necessary. That type of relationship between a body and a target can be found out by a fairly trivial SPARQL query; using SPARQL as some sort of a rule engine (using SPARQL CONSTRUCT) one can generate new graphs with this relations, etc. RDF people have powerful tools already, we do not have to add additional things. Non-RDF people will not care… > Or (perhaps) a link relationship that could be used with either an annotation or a body? > > GET /blog-post/comment-1 > HTTP/1.1 200 OK > Link: </blog-post>; rel="annotates" > That scenario done now would look like: > > GET /blog-post/comment-1 > 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> > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub <https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/101>. > -- GitHub Notif of comment by iherman See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/101#issuecomment-153867813
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2015 21:16:27 UTC