- From: gsergiu via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2016 08:42:16 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
@azaroth42 I think that we have the key for the answer in you question: > That said, the review did reveal needs that aren't solved by unicode. The properties are not only for embedded strings (which in JSON we can expect to be unicode) but for arbitrary resources with URIs. I have no idea how PDFs store text strings (for example) and how well implemented the control characters are in those strings, but I can point you to many instances of older or just badly implemented XML documents in a huge variety of encodings. As these resources can take the role of the body of the Annotation, the unicode proposal isn't sufficient to address the requirements. I see it exactly the opposite. One might need to know the text direction for correct representation of text embedded in the annotations (TextualBody), not for the correct respresentation of external resources. The external resources must have included inside the "files/bitstreams" all information required for a correct representation. It is not the responsability of annotations to correct wrong html/pdf/xml. (I might be a usecase for it ... but it is not included in the current version of the standard). -- GitHub Notification of comment by gsergiu Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/335#issuecomment-237790411 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 5 August 2016 08:42:25 UTC