Re: W3C Annotation Working Group?

Dear Lutz,
thank you for your support!
We are looking forward to see you and your group involved!

Best,
Paolo


On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Lutz Suhrbier <l.suhrbier@bgbm.org> wrote:

>  Hi Robert, Paolo
>
> our project is currently applying for new funding, but we are quite
> optimistic to continue for another three years working on annotations.
> Moving OA one step further would be great! As Freie Universität Berlin is
> member of W3C (at least, I remember that I could register at W3C as FUB
> affiliate), I guess membership in WG should also be no problem.
>
> best regards
> Lutz
>
>
>  First, we hope that you've all had a safe and happy holidays!
>
>  Just before the break, a conversation was started in the W3C about
> possibly using annotation as an experimental means of commenting on
> specifications and drafts; this conversation also drew the attention on the
> more general need for Web users to annotate web pages at large. This
> practical requirement would tie in neatly with the ongoing work in the
> Digital Publishing Interest Group and in the IDPF (http://idpf.org/) to
> flesh out the use cases and application of the Open Annotation model in
> that field.
>
> In order to take our annotation work to the next level, especially in the
> publishing domain but across the board in terms of annotation being a
> critical component of the Open Web Platform including browser-facing
> aspects, a number of people feel that creating an Annotations Working Group
> (WG) is both timely and important. This group would formalize and build on
> the Open Annotation specification and data model, and would also explore
> the browser side such as robust addressability, events, JavaScript APIs,
> and so on; the precise details would be worked out over the next several
> weeks in a proposed Annotations WG charter, within W3C's Information and
> Knowledge (INK) domain. The result would be a one or more official
> technical Recommendations (e.g., http://www.w3.org/TR/OpenAnnotation/)
> which can only be created by a WG, not by a Community Group.
>
> Ivan Herman and Doug Schepers would help guide the group in their
> capacities at W3C, Ivan on the Semantic Web, Linked Data, and Digital
> Publishing side, and Doug on the Web application, browser, and developer
> outreach side.
>
> What does this mean for the Community Group?  Firstly, all W3C members are
> warmly and strongly encouraged to join the Working Group! Secondly, since
> the WG will continue to conduct all its technical work in public, anyone
> who is not affiliated with a member institution can continue to be part of
> the discussion on the mailing list, and those who are able to actively
> contribute (e.g. editing, writing tests, managing issues, or maintaining
> support documents like use cases and requirements or developer
> documentation) will be considered for Invited Expert status.
>
>  If you just want to keep track of what's going on, then there's no need
> to do anything different. While the specification discussions would move to
> the Working Group, we would keep the Open Annotation Community Group alive
> as a platform to solicit broader feedback to issues arising in the WG, and
> to provide a discussion forum for existing community members. Paolo and I
> will take responsibility for acting as go-betweens for the CG and WG --
> your input and support throughout the process so far has been extremely
> valuable and greatly appreciated.  We will make sure there's clear
> communication and close ties with this existing community.
>
> Please let us know your thoughts on this idea!  While we think that a
> formal TR will carry significantly more weight than the current community
> draft, especially with larger industrial potential adopters, and that a
> broader scope of work can strengthen the market, we want to make sure you
> agree that the creation of a WG is the right thing to do at this stage. Do
> you think this is the right step? Would you be interested in participating
> in this proposed WG? Please give us your comments here!
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Rob and Paolo
>
>
>


-- 
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
Member of the MGH Biomedical Informatics Core
+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.