Re: [web-annotation] Model should allow multiple Selectors per SpecificResource

@tbdinesh :

>Imagining a scenario:
>say we have linguistic states
>such as en-state, nl-state, .. kn-state
>then the alternates would be specific to the language
>with say the quoted-text options being "one must", "een moet", ..

Well... this example actually shows the ambivalence of the situation: 
that there is no way to check whether a multi-selector usage is 
correct or not.


* If the goal is to annotate a particular, say, quote in a book in the
 sense of quoting from the "work" (say, I want to annotate the first 
chapter of a particular novel) then yes, this example is fine because 
I offer the alternative for various languages.
* However, if I want to annotate the translations of a book, ie, I 
want to make a comment on the Dutch but also the Kannada translations,
 I would think that the example is incorrect, because I should have a 
separate annotation (ie, separate targets with Specific Resources) on 
the two translations, and not bound into one with a multiple selector.

There is a fine line between these two, and it may be a kind of a 
judgement call on whether a particular set up is acceptable or not. 
Put it another way, whether the two (or more) selectors refer to the 
same content is not an independently verifiable claim...

Maybe the correct approach is a MAY (as in "multiple selectors MAY be 
used if they refer to the same target"), with a note making it clear 
that the usage of that particular selection may be different from one 
application to the other and may lead to interoperability issues. I 
can live with that.

GitHub Notification of comment by iherman
Please view or discuss this issue at
 using your GitHub account

Received on Sunday, 1 May 2016 07:28:39 UTC