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

Re: [web-annotation] Multiple Selectors

From: Hugo Manguinhas via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:33:08 +0000
To: public-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-174448667-1453714385-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Hi all, 

@iherman, about the domain for oa:hasSelector, I was not suggesting to
 define it using a formal language, just make a note in the spec.... 
btw, is there such formal definition in RDFS or perhaps OWL? but, just
 a note that the domain could just be open without the need to 
prescribe either oa:SpecificResource or oa:Selector as rdfs:domain.

for the discussions on the stating the @type explicitly or implicit 
(entailed by one of the properties), my concern is for data consumers 
that are not applying RDF technology and thus may be expecting the 
@type to help determine how they will interpret and process the 
remaining structure... the @type may also play a important role for 
data consistency/validation as different clients/implementations may 
apply different modelling patterns but also may have miss-interpreted 
the spec and used it in a way that it is not expected... I would thus 
vote to keep it as much as possible even though it may become slightly
 more verbose.

Finally, I would add as another cons for the solution I proposed, that
 it would require twice the nesting (because of the additional 
SpecicResource in between) comparing with the simple nesting of 

GitHub Notification of comment by hugomanguinhas
Please view or discuss this issue at 
 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 25 January 2016 09:33:10 UTC

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