- From: BigBlueHat via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:50:06 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
**If** we're extracting anything, I'd prefer we extract all of Section 4: Specific Resource, discuss it's pieces for their broadest possible use (State, Style, etc), and move things *back* into the Annotation Model if they are deemed to be Annotation specific--which I'm pretty sure none of these are. However, to Rob's point about... > The great thing about RDF is that you can pull appropriate classes and predicates from different vocabularies and use them as needed. ...we (as a WG) would need a clear reason why extracting it from Annotation and (our...presumably) publishing it as a separate document was more valuable and/or less confusing than RDF folks (etc) depending on the Annotation context and vocabulary to get access to SpecificResource, Selector, etc. @iherman given that you're a key driver here, what do you see as the benefits of SpecificResource, Selector (and/or the other bits) being put into a separate document over folks just "consuming" the Annotation vocab into their APIs? Other than "marketing" SpecificResource as a "new thing" with value all it's own (beyond annotation--which it certainly does have), I don't see much more that it gets us, but happy to be wrong. :smile_cat: -- GitHub Notification of comment by BigBlueHat Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/110#issuecomment-159714420 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 25 November 2015 19:50:12 UTC