- From: Jacob via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 16:09:38 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
@gsergiu , @pciccarese is misremembering. As @azaroth42 mentions, motivation was introduced by the community group to explicitly replace the flat class "hierarchy" that one of its predecessors (the open annotation collaboration (OAC)) had previously established. One of it's (many) functions is to provide a hook for searching by _annotation kind_. However, it was pointed out that one of the problems with reusing rdfs:Class in this way is that it conflates _kind of content_ with _specialization/generalization of kind_. Since the OAC class vocabulary was essentially noting the kind of content (along the axis of annotation intentions) and it was decided that formalizing it's metadata as a predicate whose range was mapped to SKOS concepts would be much more flexible than trying to create an overarching class hierarchy that would inevitably expand forever (or bog down with debates about conflicting terminological definitions). If you look at the community group's archives the pertinent discussions, especially at the final face-to-face meeting (somewhere there are slides on this topic by Bob Morris and myself) can be found. +1 to Rob's close wontfix. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jjett Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/248#issuecomment-222738003 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2016 16:09:40 UTC