Fragment URIs incompatible with Fragment Selectors?

• From: Vladimir Alexiev <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
• Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 12:38:39 +0300
• To: <public-annotation@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <08ca01d0eed1$22f08cf0$68d1a6d0$@ontotext.com>

http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#fragment-uris says
"Fragment URIs are not compatible with other methods of describing the
segment more specifically, described in the Specific Resources section"

But I wonder why the two must be incompatible.
- It seems to me that in
http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#fragment-selector, using a URL with
fragment (e.g. <target1#fragment>) instead of an unrelated URL (e.g.
<sptarget1>) would be nicer
- the fragment is not sent by a client to the server, is that the problem?
   If so, please add it to the list of "consequences" at
http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#fragment-uris.
   I'm not sure that's a problem, eg NIF uses <#char=start,end> URLs with
impunity

(Otherwise, I agree that URLs are opaque, and providing the fragment in a
separate field is a better practice)

Cheers!

Received on Monday, 14 September 2015 09:39:03 UTC