W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > October 2018

Re: Web annotations for physical texts

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 17:25:17 +0200
To: public-openannotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <a21dd53a-bc73-f1b8-65ed-6a5062883d86@kcoyle.net>
Do be aware that the ISBN was instituted in 1968 and took a few years to
be fully employed. Also note that it is applied as a point-of-purchase
code, and represents the product (hard back v paper back, British text v
American text, ePub v Kindle) not the text. For citations that may be a
good thing, but it depends on the desired functionality.

kc

On 10/13/18 10:14 AM, Steven Harms wrote:
> Given two endorsements for CTS in short order, I read the description
> and it seemed intuitive and to cover the required specificity easily. As
> such:
> 
> urn:cts:CTSNAMESPACE:WORK:PASSAGE@SUBREFERENCE
> 
> Would become
> 
> urn:cts:isbn:###:<PASSAGE>
> 
> Pros:
> 
> 1. Intuitive!
> 
> Cons:
> 
> 1. With ISBN we lose the human friendliness of say, “JK Rowling wrote
> HP&Philospher’s stone.” This can be remedied, of course, by a higher
> container holding human-friendly data, but it seems like an obvious nit
> to address. MLA and other citation schemes preserve this visibly in the
> citation. 
> 
> Question:
> 
> 1. How to handle <PASSAGE> in a book?
> 
> Pasting the full text seems onerous. To annotate passage p, I don’t want
> to have to type in passage p *and* my annotation. This would also set
> one afoul of copyright holders. 
> 
> Further, range offsets, while completely reasonable are not given
> generally outside of epic poetry or other classics.
> 
> Certainly many e-readers make this calculation possible and that will
> surely be the correct scheme for annotations from that medium.. However,
> my focus remains real books ;)
> 
> The most common scheme for a popular book would be the page. The docs
> state, failing an offset:
> 
>> A reference to an individual passage is formatted as dot-separated components representing one or more levels of the citation hierarchy defined in a CTS TextInventory for that work.
> 
> Now for most popular works, there is no CTS TextInventory — to the best
> of my knowledge.
> 
> So: is there a low-friction way to refer to a page?
> 
> Thanks for the suggestions to now,
> 
> Steven
> 
> 
> (Typos and blunders my own as i’m On vacation without access to a
> keyboard ;))
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 3:54 AM Christopher Blackwell
> <cwblackwell@gmail.com <mailto:cwblackwell@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Dear Steven,
> 
>     The CTS URN might be helpful:
> 
>     http://cite-architecture.github.io/ctsurn/
> 
>     Part of the CITE Architecture: http://cite-architecture.github.io
> 
>     (Disclosure: This is a thing I’ve worked on over the years.)
> 
>     This blog post points to some live examples of real data integrated
>     with CTS URNs: 
> 
>     http://homermultitext.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-homer-multitext-microservice-homer.html
> 
>     If this looks at all interesting, please don’t hesitate to send
>     along further questions.
> 
>     Cheers,
>     Chris B.
> 
> 
>     --
>     Christopher W. Blackwell
>     The Louis G. Forgione University Professor
>     Department of Classics
>     Furman University
> 
>>     On Oct 10, 2018, at 1:57 PM, Steven Harms
>>     <sgharms@stevengharms.com <mailto:sgharms@stevengharms.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Greetings,
>>
>>     I am interested in creating annotations on physical books [1
>>     <https://stevengharms.com/research/semweb-topic/problem_statement/>].
>>
>>     As the name "web annotations" suggests, the default target of
>>     the Web Annotation Working Group would be, of course, to
>>     annotation IRI-referable targets with IRI-identifiable Annotations.
>>
>>     1. Is there a model whereby we could point to a physical resource
>>     in a URI / IRI format (and thus join the existing Web Annotation
>>     universe, *or*
>>     2. Is there a framework that might support referring to physical
>>     books that I've simply not found
>>     3. Or should I plan to use JSON-LD to create "forge my own path?"
>>
>>     I hope to post an example of what #3 might look like, but I'd like
>>     to double check my understanding before engaging in in such an
>>     effort, /tabula rasa/.
>>
>>     Regards,
>>
>>     Steven
>>
>>
>>     [1]: https://stevengharms.com/research/semweb-topic/problem_statement/
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Steven G. Harms
>>     PGP: E6052DAF
>>     <https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x337AF45BE6052DAF>
> 
> -- 
> Steven G. Harms
> PGP: E6052DAF
> <https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x337AF45BE6052DAF>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Saturday, 13 October 2018 15:25:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 13 October 2018 15:25:45 UTC