Re: [Moderator Action] Annotation UCs

Right, the annotations can "live" anywhere that's useful. If there are
multiple annotations that should be collected together, the model
introduces a Collection -
https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#collections - that can be split up
into pages if needed.  These collections could simply be part of the PWP.
If that's insufficient, do please let us know :)

Rob


On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:

>
> > On 22 Aug 2016, at 12:07, Boris Anthony <boris@rebus.foundation> wrote:
> >
> > Aha!
> > I suspect it is, roughly.
> >
> > Perhaps the one further question I have then for PWP is whether we
> imagine that annotations, of whatever form/type, become part of a PWP or
> are kept separate?
>
> I think, depending on the usage, both should be possible. If I annotate a
> manuscript than you and I work together, or simply to add notes to myself,
> then being part of the PWP might be perfectly enough. If a class annotated
> a collection of books to make a study on something, the annotations may be
> better stored separately in a server, because it can be organized, tagged,
> etc, in global manner. It may also depend on the access rights for the PWP.
>
> The current W3C annotation model defines a separate annotation protocol
> for the servers case, but it does not define any user interface, ie, it
> allows for both.
>
> Cheers
>
> Ivan
>
> >
> > (I imagine them bound—the way my pencil marks in a book are now part of
> the book—but extractable with links back. See as an example of the latter
> in my personal web-based library prototype, where I extract my annotations
> [1]. The former I cannot show you as it is only available on my locally
> hosted mirror. Perhaps a demo at TPAC?)
> >
> > In any case, my apologies to the list for this attention detour due to
> my novice status in these engagements. :)
> >
> > B.
> >
> > [1] http://boris.libra.re/library/book/b45a3153-7050-4c83-86eb-
> 0aaf878625ed
> >
> >
> >> On 22 Aug 2016, at 11 :52 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ah!
> >>
> >> Well… the Annotation WG has worked on this. The Annotation Data
> Model[1] (which currently in CR), has a section on selectors[2] which
> introduces a possibility to 'anchor' an annotation in a more flexible and
> standard manner. The structure is actually extensible if needed. B.t.w.,
> because the notion of selectors may be useful beyond the realm of
> annotation, the WG decided to publish (later) a separate Note that extracts
> the standard into a separate document to make it more palatable, and also
> provides a more flexible fragment ID; see [3] for an editor's draft, there
> is no official publication yet (planned for later in the autumn).
> >>
> >> The question is, of course, whether [1-3] covers what annotations in
> PWP need. If there are some specific issues on anchoring that would
> require, e.g., and extension of the selectors, or the final standardization
> of section 5 in [3], then this is worth adding to this document. But, on
> the other hand, this may go into too much details.
> >>
> >> Is this what you were referring to?
> >>
> >> Ivan
> >>
> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-annotation-model-20160705/
> >> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-annotation-model-20160705/#selectors
> >> [3] http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/selector-note/index-respec.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 22 Aug 2016, at 11:31, Boris Anthony <boris@rebus.foundation>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bonus thought: persistent reliable annotation display in-situ
> requires a standard way of “mapping” a document; how to locate points in a
> document to which various annotation types and behaviors are attached.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am not sure I understand what you mean…
> >>>
> >>> When making an annotation on a digital text, the annotation must
> “know” the precise location in the text it is “placed."
> >>>
> >>> A simple note is anchored to a point in a text.
> >>> A highlight starts and ends at very precise points in a text.
> >>> etc…
> >>>
> >>> In my experience so far, schemes and tactics of doing this have been
> left to reader software implementors; Kindle, Kobo, Readmill, Hypothesis,
> etc all have their own way of identifying such points. This means that an
> annotation I make on a text in Kindle is not visible — nevermind in the
> right place — if I move the document to a Kobo, for example.
> >>>
> >>> There is a separation here of “software approaches” and the notion of
> “having a map of the document’s terrain” (based on DOM and text strings,
> usually, though Kindle seems to use a character count based on the file in
> question… a weak approach that proves how little they value annotation but
> I digress).
> >>> One of these should be standardised (I assume the latter…)
> >>>
> >>> By way of analogy:
> >>> The great explosion in open digital cartography would not have been
> possible if the latitude longitude system had not been adopted as a
> standard way of referencing points on a globe.
> >>>
> >>> How do we standardise a way of referencing points in a document?
> >>> (and what does the resulting map look like? ;)
> >>>
> >>> This may be out of scope for PWP, perhaps even W3C, but it does need
> addressing by someone…
> >>>
> >>> (Again, my hunch is DOM + Text string parsing…)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> Is it in this group’s, or Annotation WG’s, purview to broach this
> topic or is that left to the field to define best practices?
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> B.
> >>
> >>
> >> ----
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> ----
> 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
>
>
>
>
>


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