Re: [Open Annotation] some questions

Hi Paolo,

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Paolo Ciccarese
<paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>wrote:

> Christian,
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Christian Morbidoni <
> christian.morbidoni@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Robert, all,
>>
>> as you suggested...here I'am with asking for some clarifications :-)
>>
>> 1) We are using xpointers and would like to model using Fragment
>> Selectors, however we also would like to support different kinds of media
>> fragments (e.g. video, images, etc.). So we would need to have
>> specializations as subclasses of oa:FragmentSelector, e.g.
>> pundit:XPointerFragmentSelector
>>
>
> I was looking at the section
> http://www.openannotation.org/spec/extension/#Selector and we don't
> mention subclassing the FragmentSelector. I think it could make sense.
> The overall idea is to agree on common shared selectors so any proposal
> should be considered.
>

Good! My proposal would be XPointerFragmentSelector, is there a way to make
it an explicit proposal? :-/


>
>> 2) Instead of having FragmentSelectors as resources wouldn't it make
>> sense to model like this ?
>> :fragment :hasXPointerFragmentSelector "fragment" .
>> :fragment :hasSource <http://exmaple.org/page1.html> .
>> It would be a more compact representation and I see no big drawbacks.
>>
>
> What is :fragment in your context?
>

Sorry, it was not clear . :fragment is a target of an annotation that
represents a piece of a DOM tree...e.g. a word or a sentence  within a web
page.


>
>> 3) Is there a standard way to represent collections of annotations (in
>> Pundit we are calling them notebooks)? Should I use ORE Aggregations? I'm
>> not sure it is exactly what I need.. do you know if someone faced this
>> issue?
>>
>
> In the OAC model ORE Aggregation were used (am I right Rob?), while in
> Annotation Ontology we had a class called AnnotationSet/DocumentAnnotation.
> In the current specs we haven't included that topic yet. I recall vaguely
> we discussed about it, however, I don't remember the conclusions. Rob do
> you recall that?
>

It would be nice to have an agreement on this.
BTW: what is the current relation among the open annotation specs and the
Annotation Ontology?


>
>
>>
>> 4) In Pundit we assume a web page can include what we call "named
>> contents", that are atomic, granular pieces of content that can have
>> identifiers ( resolvable URLs). Think about a page that is divided in
>> paragraphs. A web representation of that page can include a number of
>> paragraphs and explicitly mark them up specifying identifiers (URLs) for
>> each of them. Then you could have a different page where some of the
>> paragraphs appears, perhaps mixed with other content (e.g. commentary, or
>> text taken from other sources, etc.). You can read more at
>> http://thepund.it/client.php under "Play nice with Pundit".
>> In practice we are using such named contents as targets of our
>> annotations (instead of the URL of the enclosing web page), so that we are
>> able to show annotations in whatever web page includes those named
>> contents, and furthermore, allows us to correctly display the annotation
>> even if the HTML around a named content changes. However, we also want an
>> annotation to remember the enclosing web page (containing the named
>> content) where it has been created. To this end we are using a
>> pundit:hasPageContext relation.
>> ... I know this is a bit tricky and I hope I succeeded in explaining it
>> :-)
>> Do you think this could be relevant to open annotation?
>>
>
> We have been facing these issues in Domeo v1 and we have been adopting a
> similar (custom) solution to the once you outlined. I recall other solution
> coming from the OAC sphere. As I am going to have the alpha of Domeo v.2
> out in September it would be nice to have an agreement on how to do that
> within the Open Annotation framework.
>

I see too different issues:

1) Informing the annotation application of the constituent sub-parts
(named-contents in my jargon) that are included into a web page. In Pundit
we are assuming compliant web pages to include a markup for this:

<div class="pundit-content" about="http://example.org/contents/123">
 <!-- HTML goes here. -->
 <p>This is a named content and contains both text and a picture</p>
 <img src="http://example.org/pictires/pictire123.png" />
 <p><em>Caption:</em> this is a caption.</p>
</div>

2) Having a specific property that connects an annotation to the web page
that were displaying the annotated content (e.g. an image, a video a text
paragraph)  at the time the user created the annotation.



>
>
>>
>> best,
>>
>> Christian
>>
>
>
> Best
> Paolo
>