- From: Jacob via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 16:27:46 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
@iherman I think your suggestion over complicates the situation. If we're limiting ourselves to pure RDF issues then the purpose of the Specific Resource is to act as a signpost indicating under which circumstances a group of assertions about some web resource is true. However since Specific Resource is a class it has no relationship to the annotation class per se (such relationships are the product of the hasBody and hasTarget predicates). As long as we don't define the class in such a way that it must be interpreted as something only ever within the range of the hasBody and hasTarget predicates then I don't see any reason not to expose it for use in contexts outside of annotations (in which it is only contingently involved in anyway). Selectors have to do with Specific Resources and not with Annotations. We don't use Selectors (or any of the other Specifier vocabulary) when we don't have Specific Resources. From an RDF perspective these are a completely separate set of triples from the annotation and only relate to it through the rather general assertion of annotation -- hasBody/hasTarget -- specific resource. As noted we have use cases in hand for selecting things in contexts other than annotations. Specific Resource works very well to manage the transition from global assertion to assertion in context. So I don't see a reason not to spin out all of section 3. Not spinning it out is going to put me an the awkward position of reinventing it for collections and other bibliographic object contexts... -- GitHub Notification of comment by jjett Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/110#issuecomment-187773781 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2016 16:27:48 UTC