- From: Pierre-Antoine <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
- Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:34:11 +0200
- To: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Hi again, in several places in the API, we have qualifiers to the returned value: Contributor.role Fragment.role Relation.relationship by contributing to the API Open Issues wiki page, I realize that I'm not sure of what is inteded here. Is it expected that a) we define in our API a list of possible roles for contributors (to keep this sole example), and define a mapping of this list with all the possible roles in the in-scope formats ? Or do we expect b) to get here a string coming "directly" from the underlying format? I was implicitly assuming (b) (e.g. in my mail [1]) but it seems to me that others are assuming (a) -- and the more I think about its, the more I prefer (a) myself ;) It seems to offer a greater interoperability and is homogeneous to what we do for 1st level properties (defining a "central" property, and a mapping from that property to any other). Could anybody confirm that this is how they envision the definition of those "sub-properties" in the API? pa [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Oct/0038.html
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 13:34:47 UTC