- From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 14:21:01 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
I must admit I am fairly uneasy about the idea of reorganizing the motivations at this point. As @paolociccarese said, motivations are a set of SKOS concepts, and they are actually a flat structure, not even using the skos terminology to create some form of a hierarchy. Defining some sort of a hierarchy to mirror schema.org is not an obvious thing to do. Beyond the timing aspect, I am not even that sure that schema.org/Action is a good model. What it says, on the top level: > An action performed by a direct agent and indirect participants upon a direct object. Optionally happens at a location with the help of an inanimate instrument. The execution of the action may produce a result. Specific action sub-type documentation specifies the exact expectation of each argument/role. What this suggests (although not really clearly said) is that a schema Action is to model an active entity, like a process, widget, or something similar which, as the text says, has an 'execution' that may even produce a result. An annotation is actually a relationship between a target and the body, with a bunch of descriptions of that relationship. It is not a process. An action has an 'agent', has 'participants', etc (worth looking at the examples at the bottom of https://schema.org/Action). My conclusion is that schema.org/Action and an Annotation are different animals. We should not mix them. -- GitHub Notification of comment by iherman Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/248#issuecomment-222703461 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2016 14:21:03 UTC