W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > January 2016

Re: [web-annotation] Annotation alsoKnownAs <uri>

From: BigBlueHat via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 18:45:59 +0000
To: public-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-170649433-1452537959-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
:+1: for `canonical`! I was wondering about the publish offline first 
scenario with regards to `id` and `via`.

I think it would look like:

Offline:
```json
{
  "id": "urn:uuid:1234-567...",
  "target": "http://...."
}
```

Published online later:
```json
{
  "id": "http://annotations.example/blah-blah",
  "canonical": "urn:uuid:1234-567...",
  "target": "http://...."
}
```

Aggregated elsewhere:
Published online later:
```json
{
  "id": "http://other.example/blah-blah-again",
  "via": ["http://annotations.example/blah-blah"],
  "canonical": "urn:uuid:1234-567...",
  "target": "http://...."
}
```

Does that make sense?

Should the (offline) first example also re-state it's `id` in the 
`canonical` value--and if so, should that be a requirement? Thought 
being that if it were already there, then future systems MUST leave it
 alone and MUST move the value of `id` to the `via` 
breadcrumb/chain/thing.

Other than that question, I think this thing sings pretty sweetly now.
 :notes: :bird:

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by BigBlueHat
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/21#issuecomment-170649433
 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 11 January 2016 18:46:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:43 UTC