- From: Rob Sanderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 17:21:35 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
azaroth42 has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation: == Dis/Allow both hasState and hasSelector on same SpecificResource? == Assuming #195, there are two options: 1. Require refinedBy as the only way to have both a State and Selector. 2. Allow both on the SpecificResource, as well as refining them. I prefer 2, for the following reasons: * You could never reuse a State, as the selectors would always apply. This seems a shame, as HttpRequestState is very easy to reuse (here are my default headers). * Inconsistent with Style, Purpose, Scope and Rendering which all associate with the SR, and fit into the workflow. * Inconsistent with existing implementations, whereas refining is a new feature [really an improvement/simplification of an old feature that was too complex to implement] * It would not allow for optional States. E.g. TimeState lets you say "here is where you can get the exact version I saw" ... but chances might be very good that you can just use the source URI if the representation doesn't change frequently or significantly * Choice of State would mean repeating the Selector(s) on each of them. This would either make our tree into a graph (and we'd need to be clear about where you can shortcut), or be very repetitive. * I think, along with @nickstenning and @tilgovi I believe, that the most effective way to represent this is to describe as much as possible and let the advanced clients figure out what they can do and the less advanced just trundle their way through the options until they get something that works or that they understand. The more explicit and fixed the workflow is, the less room there is for innovation around robust anchoring problems that we know we haven't solved. Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/205 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 22 April 2016 17:21:37 UTC