RE: WA vs. OA

I have encountered many who don’t even know that Web Annotations exists but are deeply invested in OA and still building tools around OA. Adding a warning with a pointer to WA is a really good idea.

Tzviya Siegman
Information Standards Lead
Wiley
201-748-6884
tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>

From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org]
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 5:25 AM
To: Robert Sanderson
Cc: W3C Public Annotation List
Subject: Re: WA vs. OA


On 20 May 2016, at 09:50, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com<mailto:azaroth42@gmail.com>> wrote:


This is what I was saying on Wednesday ... if we change the namespace, rather than creating a new one, we force the update to the new model.  This is why we left the CG work as a draft. We should put a warning into the OA drafts regardless.


+1


There is a lot of brand name recognition for Open Annotation, far far more than "web annotation" which seems more like a generic class of annotations. This was also discussed when OAC and AO merged -- we dropped the "Collaboration" and the "Ontology" to try and be more inclusive.

OA has had a lot of time and outreach to gain traction and mindshare, which I feel we should capitalize on.  The split helps no one.

If we change from http to https on the namespace, we are doomed anyway. Ie, if we do not want to change the namespace URL, that includes the scheme change or not. (Just making clear what the conclusions are…)

Ivan



Note that the presentation that followed the NaCTeM one from EMBL-EBI said "web annotation data model" but was actually the open annotation model (it used oa:SemanticTag, which no longer exists).

Rob


On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org<mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
Listening the various presentations at I Annotate… I think we have to do some active outreach steps so that various implementations should NOT implement whatever they do based on OA but based on WA. I am not sure what the best way to do this (there probably several actions to be done); one possibility is to "officially" rescind the OA documents, ie, add some notes on the front pages warning the user that she/he should refer to the WA as the most up-to-date annotation model & co. I am a little bit concerned that OA will, somehow, overshadow WA.


I.

----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/

mobile: +31-641044153<tel:%2B31-641044153>
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704







--
Rob Sanderson
Semantic Architect
The Getty Trust
Los Angeles, CA 90049


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/

mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704