Re: status by using topics

Marja Koivunen wrote:
> This is one idea I have had for a long time. It may need a bit more user 
> interface work, but what do you think?
> 
> I created the status values as a topic hierarchy and posted them 
> http://www.annotea.org/mozilla/testdata/status.rdf so that I can share 
> the status with other people. It is all RDF.
> 
> Then I subscribed the status.rdf file and created a new bookmark file 
> and started giving some of my existing mozilla/xul problems a status. 
> Here is what it looks like right now 
> http://www.annotea.org/mozilla/status.png.

This is quite interesting.  The nice thing for your bookmark client is 
that this approach gives you the status feature (including a summary 
view) almost "for free."  My company's Annotea project involves 
annotations, not bookmarks so I am not sure I can use the same approach. 
  Can bm:hasTopic be used with Annotation objects, RDF calendar objects, 
and so on?  Another possibility would be to use r:type, although that 
would require more work for bookmark implementations than your "status 
by using topics" approach.

Another question has to do with cardinality:  I do not think it makes 
sense for the same object to have more than one status.  Is there any 
way to limit the value to one in your approach?  What about for a 
a:status property such as I proposed?


> User can control if she/he wants to see the status by deciding weather 
> to subscribe the status.rdf or not.

Does "subscribing" just mean incorporating the RDF by reference?  Is 
that a feature of your bookmarks implementation or a general concept? 
It seems like you are saying that if the URI associated with a 
bm:hasTopic property is not understood by the bookmark client, it does 
not display that topic?


> Currently order is just alphabetical, but Jose actually already created 
> schema for adding the order to the bookmark schema so I could implement 
> that and start using it.

Where can I learn more about that (controlling the order)?  I am not 
very up-to-date on the Annotea bookmarks work.


> The nice thing here is that groups of users or even individual users can 
> easily define what status information they want to use. The better 
> standard we make the more it is hopefully subscribed but if it does not 
> meet the needs of the people they can make their own and if it makes 
> sense just make connections from their status topics to a more widely 
> accepted status topics.

I like that aspect of your solution.  I do believe that a well thought 
out set of status values should be defined and published somewhere.

-Mark

Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2005 16:00:10 UTC