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

Re: [web-annotation] Narrow `hasScope` to match `as:scope` and introduct `as:context`

From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 04:44:17 +0000
To: public-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-155996022-1447303455-sysbot+gh@w3.org>

> Related to #102 <https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/102>
> Apparently (per @tilgovi <https://github.com/tilgovi>), Hypothes.is 
is using oa:hasScope to "relate a (arbitrarily deeply nested) reply to
 the root document context of the thread."
> 
> Such that a user agent could query an annotation server by the 
current URL and find:
> 
> all the annotations
> all the replies to those annotations
> Here's how we've defined hasScope (note the or):
> 
> The relationship between a Specific Resource and the resource that 
provides the scope or context for it in this Annotation.
> 
> The includes use case is:
> 
> Zara makes a comment about an image in a particular web page to say 
that it is not the right organization's logo. Her client includes the 
page that the image is being rendered in, however the annotation is 
associated with the image resource itself.
> 
> Both this use case and @tilgovi <https://github.com/tilgovi>'s reply
 related one would include these expected actions by the annotation 
user agent:
> 
> given the original annotation
> retrieve any resource(s) that are the target
> an image, a reply, the original document
> if there's a scope resource, retrieve that/those also
> present the annotations as much as possible within the context of 
their creation
>  So...the or situation works...but should we consider separating 
them into two properties: scope and context? (read on! )
> 
> ActivityStreams 2.0 Vocabulary breaks these concepts into two 
properties:
> scope <http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#dfn-scope>
> Identifies one or more entities that represent the total population 
of entities for which the object can considered to be relevant.
> 
> context 
<http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#dfn-context>
> Identifies the context within which the object exists or an activity
 was performed.
> 
I must admit that, within the world of annotations, I struggle making 
a difference between these two… Which makes me think that we should 
not, at least for now, differentiate between them.

> Honestly, I've gone 'round and 'round  on this one... Either seems 
appropriate. One could consider the "larger work" to be the "total 
population of entities for which the object can [sic] considered to be
 relevant" OR one could think of it as "the context within which the 
object exists or an activity was performed." However, I do believe 
that (given those), context (as defined in AS2) would be more correct 
for a reply annotation--in that the original document may not actually
 be available when the reply is made...nor even of interest to the 
author of the reply annotation.
> 
> 's?
> 
> 
> 





-- 
GitHub Notif of comment by iherman
See 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/109#issuecomment-155996022
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2015 04:44:19 UTC

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