- From: Tim Cole via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 18:13:02 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
It is deja vu all over again. The model and vocabulary documents define the class oa:Choice (json key Choice) as "a subClass of as:OrderedCollection that conveys to a consuming application that it should select one of the resources in the as:items list to use, rather than all of them." In closing issues #92, #145, etc. I thought we had concluded that as:OrderedCollection (or a subclass of it) would be appropriate to replace both oa:List and oa:Composite (from previous iterations of the model). This would provide a means to differentiate target as array, 'Body is considered to be equally related to each Target individually,' from Paolo's use case of multiple resources grouped together as a collection to serve as annotation target. In closing #92, I do not recall agreeing to drop this use case altogether (but this could be faulty memory - pointer?). Since then we have defined the json key 'AnnotationCollection' to be the alias for 'as:OrderedCollection' which means we don't have a key that we can use for the equivalent of the old oa:Composite / oa:List classes when it comes to grouping resources used collectively as a target or body. Personally I still see a need a json key for this, and as mentioned I thought this is what we agreed to collectively in closing the various multiplicity issues previously discussed. I appreciate that some folks will not will not be interested in the distinction between a json array and any 'Collection' class or subclass, but we've already found it necessary for Choice and for sets of Annotations, so why not for Collections formerly known as Composite / List? BTW, I note the old oa:List class is still to be found in Appendix A of our latest model Working Draft (https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#complete-example). I assume this is just an editorial oversight, but I choose to take it as a sign that we need something like oa:List (json key List) as another sub-class of as:OrderedCollection to handle the use case Paolo is raising. Personally I find List a straightforward complement to Choice (no more nor less complex), it is consistent with at least what some of us understood when issues #92, #145, etc. were closed, and I do not agree that Paolo's use case fails by the 80/20 rule. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tcole3 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/207#issuecomment-216953023 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2016 18:13:06 UTC