Re: Proposal to keep motivatedBy as a property of Annotation

+1 from me as well.
On Sep 7, 2015 7:50 AM, "Suhrbier, Lutz" <L.Suhrbier@bgbm.org> wrote:

> Hi Timothy,
>
> +1 for your proposal.
>
> I also support your argumentation, that roles on specific resources can
> not replace the annotation's motivation as a whole. From my point, roles
> are very useful to outline specific intentions or relationships of parts of
> an annotation, but not for an annotation as a whole. In particular, if we
> think on annotations with multiple bodies.
>
> Best regards
> Lutz
>
>
> Am 07.09.2015 um 00:41 schrieb Timothy Cole:
>
> You'll recall from the results of the CFC and the discussions we had on
> the WG's 2 September call (
> <http://www.w3.org/2015/09/02-annotation-minutes.html>
> http://www.w3.org/2015/09/02-annotation-minutes.html), that we decided to
> go forward with the approach for adding role to SpecificResource and
> EmbeddedContent objects as outlined in Section 3.1 of
> http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/model/wd/roles.html#proposed-model-revision.
> However, 1 or 2 of the issues outlined in section 3.2 (Further
> Considerations) of that document remain to be resolved before model can be
> updated.
>
>
>
> Ivan, Ray and I took a look at one of these open issues, * 3.2.5 Remove
> motivatedBy [as a property of oa:Annotation] completely*.  In the end we
> created an additional page providing use cases / illustrations of why we
> think we need to retain the Annotation-level motivatedBy property:
>
>
>
>   http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/model/wd/AnnoLevelMotive.html
>
>
>
> Please take a look at this page and offer comments, counter-point
> arguments, agreement, etc. as appropriate. Feel free to respond directly on
> this thread if that makes most sense.
>
>
>
> In summary, we concluded that Annotation-level motivatedBy property should
> be retained in order to support 3 relatively common, intuitive and
> compelling use cases:
>
>
>
> ·         Needing to express Motivation of the Annotation as a Whole (as
> distinct from expressing the role of an individual body or target)
>
> ·         Needing to express Motivation in the Absence of a Body
>
> ·         Needing to express Motivation for an Annotation having a
> Single, Simple Textual Body (and thereby obviate the need to transform
> Simple Textual Body into SpecificResource or EmbeddedContent)
>
>
>
> Key to this discussion are the questions of
>
> 1.       whether these uses are important or minimal now that we can
> express the role of individual SpecificResource and EmbeddedContent
> objects, and
>
> 2.       whether there is a high or low risk of developers confusing
> Annotation motivatedBy and SpecificResource hasRole and as a result create
> Annotations that are difficult to understand / process when aggregated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Tim Cole
>
> University of Illinois at UC
>
>
>