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

Re: [web-annotation] Simplifying hasBody

From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 14:44:18 +0000
To: public-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-154079802-1446734657-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Rob, minor point: what is the reason to restrict hasBodyText to 0 or 
1?

Otherwise +1 for me.

I.

> The proposal is, in more detail:
> 
> Create a new property oa:hasBodyText with a domain of Annotation and
 a range of literal.
> Use text as the key in JSON-LD for that predicate
> Leave hasBody alone, other than reverting to a range of rdf:Resource
> Rename oa:text to oa:content, domain of oa:EmbeddedContent, range of
 literal
> Use content as the JSON-LD key for that predicate
> Continue to have a TextualBody class, which is subClassOf 
oa:EmbeddedContent and allows oa:hasRole (role)
> Assert in additional restrictions and the processing model that:
> 
> There MUST be 0-1 hasBodyText per Annotation
> Systems MAY treat annotation.text and annotation.body[0].content as 
equivalent
> Thus these two can be treated as equivalent:
> 
> {
>   "type": "Annotation",
>   "text": "My comment",
>   "target": "http://example.org/target"
> }
> {
>   "type": "Annotation",
>   "body": {
>     "type": "TextualBody",
>     "content": "My comment"
>   },
>   "target": "http://example.org/target"
> }
> 
> 


-- 
GitHub Notif of comment by iherman
See 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/79#issuecomment-154079802
Received on Thursday, 5 November 2015 14:44:20 UTC

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