Re: FYI: Public Draft of the W3C Annotation Working Group Charter


It looks great!

I have to say I have doubts about the mailing list thingy. I think it's start with just one for the two task forces. It's the best way to make sure both streams of work influence each other as we'd like to. We can revisit it if there's too much irrelevant traffic.
It seems less dangerous to split work that started from a common ground than to reconcile groups that had their own isolated spaces since the beginning.
Plus, I'm quite sure having several lists will create confusion on where to post many mails.

On the data annotation issue: would it be fair to record this more explicitly, i.e., stating that the provision of solution for data annotation is not in the mandatory scope? Of course it shouldn't prevent later inclusion, if a quick-win is found to be possible; it's just that we shouldn't commit, if we feel that it would send the group on a too difficult/untested path.



On 2/4/14 2:28 PM, Paolo Ciccarese wrote:
> Dear Community Group Members,
> As anticipated W3C may start a Working Group to standardize the major building blocks for annotations.
> Thanks to the work of Ivan Herman and Doug Schepers, an 'advance notice' has been issued to the W3C members[1] and a very early draft for the Working Group Charter [2] has been made available publicly.
> Any comments are welcome to finalize the draft. The best is to send them to the <> mailing list whose role is to collect all the comments coming from the community at large.
> Best,
> Paolo & Rob
> [1]
> [2]
> --
> Dr. Paolo Ciccarese
> Biomedical Informatics Research & Development
> Instructor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School
> Assistant in Neuroscience at Mass General Hospital
> Member of the MGH Biomedical Informatics Core

Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2014 19:58:23 UTC