W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Plain textual bodies - summary of arguments and possible solutions

From: Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 00:05:24 -0500
Message-ID: <CADUi7O6ftH_1B6icuCZ0SomD_rQ7uuWUBoLvv0CWigbke7mJ5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: public-openannotation@w3.org
I'm not sure what counts as "released", but the project reported in
[1] uses cnt  via its sister "Http in RDF"[2].  They appear to use it
in a fashion rather consistently with a remark in the closing of an
issue [3] in PROV declining to make it part of PROV itself


[1] Thomas Steiner et al. "Adding Meaning to Facebook Microposts via a
Mash-up API and Tracking Its Data Provenance" http://bit.ly/UQAziR

[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/HTTP-in-RDF10/

[3] ISSUE-171: HTTP in RDF http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/171

Bob Morris

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:
> Dear Bob, all
>
> After a lot of time I could finally react to your (some very interesting)
> comments.
>
> By the way there's one thing that may be more efficient over email: has
> anyone seen any data released, using the Content as text model? Besides the
> one produced by this group, I mean.
>
> Best,
>
> Antoine
>
>
>> Bernhard has produced an excellent  page on the issue wiki
>> http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/Textual_Bodies. I
>> would urge that any discussions continue there. The "history" tab on
>> that page makes it easy to find out what is evolving, and the  "watch"
>> tab provides email notifications of changes.
>>
>> Bob Morris
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Paolo Ciccarese
>> <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you Bernhard!
>>> Whatever approach we will all decide for, it is good to keep track of all
>>> these aspects for future reference.
>>>
>>> best,
>>> Paolo
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Bernhard Haslhofer
>>> <bernhard.haslhofer@cornell.edu>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> I think the current discussion on supporting plain text (literal) bodies
>>>> in the Open Annotation model is important because there are many
>>>> real-world
>>>> annotation use cases that attach such bodies to Web resources (e.g.,
>>>> Flickr). Therefore I spent some time to summarize existing pro and con
>>>> arguments and came up with possible solutions (with some help from
>>>> Antoine)
>>>> for representing plain text (literal) bodies.
>>>>
>>>> Here is the Wikipage:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/wiki/Textual_Bodies
>>>>
>>>> Apologies in advance, I tried to find and cite all arguments in the spec
>>>> and the previous thread as precisely as possible, but might have missed
>>>> one
>>>> or the other. So please fix the arguments directly in the wiki. If there
>>>> are
>>>> other possible solutions, please add them...
>>>>
>>>> It seems that there are two possible solutions at the moment:
>>>>
>>>> 1.) Allow Literals for oa:hasBody
>>>>
>>>> 2.) Introduce a shortcut property (e.g., oa:hasLiteralBody) for plain
>>>> text
>>>> bodies
>>>>
>>>> I think both solutions are feasible and meet the goal of "remaining
>>>> simple
>>>> enough to also allow for the most common use cases, such as attaching a
>>>> piece of text to a single web resource", mentioned in the introduction.
>>>>
>>>> If I had to choose now, I would probably prefer the first option because
>>>> I
>>>> am not (yet) convinced by the counter-arguments and it avoids the
>>>> introduction of another property. Also, the motivation for using OA in
>>>> our
>>>> context (maphub, yuma, etc.) is sharing and exchanging annotation data
>>>> on
>>>> the Web and not building a formal knowledge base one can use for
>>>> inferencing; therefore also allowing literals as bodies could easily be
>>>> handled by an additional "if body.isLiteral?" condition in any OA
>>>> parser.
>>>>
>>>> However, I understand that inferencing and therefore consistency is
>>>> rather
>>>> important for some other use cases, which brings me back to the second
>>>> option as a possible compromise.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Bernhard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
>>> http://www.paolociccarese.info/
>>> Biomedical Informatics Research&  Development
>>>
>>> Instructor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School
>>> Assistant in Neuroscience at Mass General Hospital
>>> +1-857-366-1524 (mobile)   +1-617-768-8744 (office)
>>>
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the
>>> addressee(s),
>>> may contain information that is considered
>>> to be sensitive or confidential and may not be forwarded or disclosed to
>>> any
>>> other party without the permission of the sender.
>>> If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
>>> immediately.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Robert A. Morris

Emeritus Professor  of Computer Science
UMASS-Boston
100 Morrissey Blvd
Boston, MA 02125-3390

IT Staff
Filtered Push Project
Harvard University Herbaria
Harvard University

email: morris.bob@gmail.com
web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/
web: http://wiki.filteredpush.org
http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
===
The content of this communication is made entirely on my
own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express
official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or
Harvard University.
Received on Monday, 4 February 2013 05:05:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:38:22 UTC