- From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:57:43 +0100
- To: Web Annotation <public-annotation@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABevsUEc5iXCee2dS0rAOkQ7+50b=zqSz8W79uVeumPJLjAv0g@mail.gmail.com>
All, I think one area that would be profitable to focus on for Tuesday at TPAC and in the coming weeks is Collections of Annotations. In particular: * We've had the use case for "lists" or "sets" of annotations to discuss for a long time but never come back to it. The IDPF EPUB work and the DPUB use cases document both express the requirement, and we talked about it at the April F2F as being useful in many situations. * After taking LDP Paging out of the protocol mix, as it doesn't support in-page ordering, we need a replacement, with the proposal being ActivityStreams OrderedCollection. This is for retrieving the set of annotations that are created and managed by a service (an LDP Container). * Search will need the same functionality for ordered pages, without the REST components for creation and management. It should use the same model and structure as above. * The use cases require some descriptive metadata about the collection of annotations. That information should be able to be internationalized, which is complicated if there's also a desire to have the format of the content be identified. However we don't want to end up down the rabbit hole of supporting every last piece of descriptive metadata that anyone might dream up ... so what's the common core that we should specify? * Currently all of the Collection information is in an ED for the Protocol... but I think it should be in Model and then referred to from Protocol with explanation as to how it aligns. Thus there could be some Collections that are static (perhaps you buy them like DVD extras), and some that are online and also Containers that can be interacted with. This would also make it more coherent as to why there are a bunch of protocol related entries in the Model's JSON-LD context appendix. Related github issues are: * https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/50 * https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/48 I'll try to have a written proposal to discuss next week :) Rob -- Rob Sanderson Information Standards Advocate Digital Library Systems and Services Stanford, CA 94305
Received on Wednesday, 21 October 2015 16:58:10 UTC