- From: Rob Sanderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 18:17:06 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
> Or at least that there exist a number of use cases where the text is later presented to a human and not merely used by a machine for comparison. I agree that there are use cases where snipped text is presented to a human, however this particular issue is about describing the text sufficiently accurately in the annotation's representation such that a second, consuming user agent can discover the correct segment in the full textual content. As such, rendering concerns are out of scope in this situation. Further, the Specific Resource identifies the selected content, not the Selector, which describes how to discover the selected content. The SpecificResource could have a separate property (e.g. `value`) that contains the content to be rendered for the user. Note the distinction with URI Fragments, which both identify (it's a URI) and describe (by means of the fragment) the content. Specific Resources intentionally pull apart these two functions. Regarding markup, it seems like a very slippery slope. If the annotated content is markdown, such as these github comments, then some *s are just characters and some are bullets * like so We also previously agreed not to normalize whitespace in #221 after discussion with #i18n. There seems to be now a request to put that back. I don't want to flipflop unnecessarily, so can we identify the situations in which whitespace normalization is (a) helpful and (b) unhelpful? The "if applicable" seems to be getting back into the fuzzy rules realm that we were trying to escape from. -- GitHub Notification of comment by azaroth42 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/227#issuecomment-222774234 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2016 18:17:08 UTC