Re: [web-annotation] Dropping type from ... what?

 I hope everyone didn't listen to all that cheesy music :)

If the annotation is made by itself when the users make
comments on the site, they will know that the top level comments
(usually) is about the video itself, not about the landing page for
the video. Other annotation tools that hardcode support for say
"" and "" and also choose Video as default type,
but with a drop-down to override.

The user does not have to choose something, so if you annotate the
target of - then you don't know.

This guess could obviously be wrong, e.g. a comment about the video
side-bar or about a commercial - but those could be tricky anyway
(e.g. different people get different auxillary context on the landing

The main topic of the youtube landing page is the presented video - so
assuming dctypes:Video here is not a far stretch.

Semantically, yes, there should ideally be a separate URL for the
video in the Youtube page, e.g. 1) . But then
annotations made elsewhere about that Youtube video is very unlikely
to use that anchor.  Using
directly means that say an Android software could correctly open the
Youtube player.

There could also be lots of other types around, which could be
discovered by inspecting microdata on the target, e.g. to see if it is
a - now you get the HTTP Range 14 issue
again if you are annotating the restaurant: "Wonderful!"  or the
restaurant's website: "Wonderful!" (the website)

1) Actually the HTML with Flash in Firefox has #placeholder-player -
but in HTML5 mode it is #movie_player - so no consistent anchor here.

On 27 August 2015 at 18:47, Doug Schepers via GitHub <> wrote:
> Jacob, Stian, can you please explain the UI/UX workflow a UA would use
>  to set dctypes that are different than the MIME type of the resource?
> I do understand your intent, but I'm less certain that we will be able
>  to get interoperability on this feature, especially in v1 of the
> spec. The model allows for custom properties, so UAs could choose to
> add dctype even if it's not part of the official Data Model, and if it
>  later turns out that we can get interop, we can add it to v2 of the
> spec.
> --
> GitHub Notif of comment by shepazu
> See

Stian Soiland-Reyes, eScience Lab
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester

Received on Thursday, 3 September 2015 10:34:54 UTC