Re: Use Cases

Am 06.03.14 21:53, schrieb Robert Sanderson:
>
> Hi Felix,
>
> Thanks for this! Yes, a section on agents involved in the use cases 
> would be very helpful.  I'll add that in the next iteration. Great 
> suggestion!

Thanks for the nice feedback, Robert! One further suggestion about such 
a section: one may add agents like "automatic annotation creators", 
since these then neeed different types of annotations, e.g. "what 
automatic tool was used". Just a suggestion.

>
> I guess, given that internationalization and accessibility are in 
> scope for provision via annotation, then additional style information 
> would also be in scope.  In the model it's relatively easy to 
> associate a CSS resource with some other resource, but there would 
> still need to be some way to assign the particular class to an element 
> or other selector. Definitely warrants some investigation :)

Indeed :)

- Felix

>
> Rob
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org 
> <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Robert,
>
>     sorry for the late follow-up on this. I have to add just one
>     question to this: in the use case document or a different
>     location, is there a description of actors? I was thinking of e.g.
>
>
>     1) content architect: providing annotations for several
>     (potentially thousands of documents)
>     2) a content author: using the templates made by content
>     architects and adapting them to her needs
>     3) a content quality evaluator: in selected pieces of content
>     making exceptions to 1) and 2)
>
>     I am mentioning this because I see styling as a kind of
>     annotation, and in CSS there are direct technical means that
>     reflect above actors:
>
>     1) CSS stylesheets
>     2) Precedence between css stylesheets; the content author will add
>     a stylsheet that is linked in a subsequent position compared to 1)
>     and hence has higher precedence
>     3) The HTML "style" attribute
>
>     So to serve such roles one needs to define rules for precedence
>     (between 1) and 2)) and inheritance (some style information
>     inherits through the whole tree, like color; others doesn't, like
>     setting of borders) and overriding (the "style" attribute
>     overrides the stylesheet information).
>
>     With the comparison to style I also tried to emphasize that above
>     actors may not be specific to localization etc., but relevant for
>     annotation in general. What do you think?
>
>     Thanks for your feedback in advance,
>
>     Felix
>
>     Am 25.02.14 16:52, schrieb Robert Sanderson:
>>
>>     Hi Dave,
>>
>>     Thanks for the links to the documents and paper, very interesting
>>     work!
>>
>>     I would propose to expand the scope of section 2.5 to
>>     "Accessibility and Internationalization Use Cases", and add 2.5.3
>>     with your P10 example from the paper.  Would that be sufficient,
>>     or do you have time to write up a more detailed use case for the
>>     document?
>>
>>     Thanks again,
>>
>>     Rob
>>
>>
>>
>>     On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie
>>     <mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi Rob, all,
>>         You may want to consider work on annotation in the
>>         Internationalization Activity, in particular the work of the
>>         MLW-LT WG which recently completed the ITS2.0 recommendation:
>>         http://www.w3.org/TR/its20/
>>
>>         There is a set of IS2.0 use cases based on current
>>         implementations available at:
>>         https://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/Use_cases_-_high_level_summary
>>         and an older set of requirements at:
>>         http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/
>>
>>         ITS2.0 addresses specific use cases related to the
>>         internationalisation and localisation of HTML5 and XML
>>         content. It therefore specifically addresses the annotation
>>         of the _textual_ content of such content, rather than
>>         annotating non-text nodes of the resulting DOM tree. However,
>>         to handle the many practical aspects, especially in relation
>>         to minimising the impact of annotation on the document, ITS
>>         possess a sophisitcated set of annotation patterns to
>>         overcome some of the limitation of third party annotations of
>>         DOM parsable documents, including a mapping to standoff
>>         meta-data in RDF. These patterns are described a bit more
>>         explicitly (compared to in the Recommendation) in a recent
>>         paper available at:
>>         https://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/images/4/4a/Locfoc13-paper36-cr.pdf
>>
>>         I'd be very interest in hearing thoughts from the group on
>>         this work and its relation to the annotation use case draft.
>>
>>         Regards,
>>         Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 24/02/2014 22:52, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>>
>>
>>             Dear all,
>>
>>             The W3C Digital Publishing Interest Group is going to
>>             publish a working draft of a Note on Annotation use cases
>>             in the near future.  I have put a pre-working draft
>>             (whatever that means :) ) of the text up at:
>>
>>             http://www.openannotation.org/usecases.html
>>
>>             Any comments, corrections, additions, etc are very welcome!
>>
>>             Thanks,
>>
>>             Rob
>>
>>             P.S. Bob, unfortunately data annotation directly isn't in
>>             scope of the IG work, but I've included it under the
>>             embedded resource use case to try and promote the discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>