Re: Re[2]: FW: acronym in title...

Using a local annotations server (I'll repeat it on a public one shortly) I
annotated the acronym "SWAD-E" in the title of the page

Part 3 below includes the context property - the critical piece that points
to a range of characters in an XML document. This uses Xpointer, so it can
refer to text in any attribute or element.

In my test run I used an annotation type of Comment (part 4 below) - there is
no reason we can't create a vocabulary with types that are expansion of
acronyms, versions in a different langauge, etc., and Lisa Seeman has already
done some work in that direction.

part 6 below refers to a body that contains the actual content of the
annotation, which can be retrieved independently (although in this example it
only works if you are running on my personal laptop, with a public annotea
server it would be accessible like any other web resource).

More details about annotea are available from
The tools I used to do this are my own publicly available ones, produced as
part of the SWAD-Europe project, available from - they are the least user
friendly of many annotea clients, being designed for incorporation into real
interfaces, but they are the most flexible. At this stage I don't think what
I did is possible in other Annotea tools, but it should be relatively simple
to adapt them.

This approach could be used by any tools for any well-formed XML (including
XHTML but not including old-fashioned HTML), but it seems to me a repair
strategy - where possible I would markup languages that allowed as much of
this as possible to be done in the document itself.

This is the annotation stored (I numbered parts for easy reference - the
numbers don't appear in the annotation itself):

1. <?xml version="1.0" ?>
2. <r:RDF xmlns:d=""
3.     <a:Annotation
                  d:title="Annotation of Demonstration for SWAD-E techniques"
                  a:created="2003/03/14 12:09:30 GMT+0"
                  d:date="2003/03/14 13:22:00 GMT+0"
4.       <r:type
5.       <a:annotates
6.       <a:body
7.     </a:Annotation>

8. </r:RDF>



On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

>Hi folks,
>I am working up a demo now. The basic idea is that using annotea we can point
>to the text in question and provide an alternative version for it - e.g. a
>couple of words in the title of an HTML document, or within an alt attribute.
>As far as I know this is not yet supported by annotea clients in a clean
>authoring/reading interface, but this may become a useful demonstration case
>for what we would like (and for why it would be better in common cases to
>have a simpler method using language built-ins).
>I'll get back to you when I have posted the demo page and annotation...
>On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Al Gilman" <>
>>To: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <>; <>;
>><>; <>
>>Cc: <>
>>Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 12:10 AM
>>Subject: Re: Re[2]: FW: acronym in title...
>>>I would approach the assistive technology developers and ask what
>>>kind of an indirect relationship they could most readily see
>>>implementing.  Will they come to the W3C DOM for this information?
>>>Do we need to get it into MSAA?
>>I think that IBM and other W3C member that create these applications could
>>reply to this.
>>>It would not be hard to write a tool that reads a glossary and
>>>adds things like the language information to HTML attributes where
>>>they appear in the DOM.  Then the assistive technology could know that
>>>'Piazza San Marco' was Italian.
>>Hum... i think it would be difficoult to have a full dictionary for all the
>>possible words.
>>But - at now - i have no proposal for solution in my mind :-/
>>>The problem is that if the HTML Working Group were to introduce an
>>>incompatible change in a minor release like that, who would implement
>>>it?  The conventional wisdom is "nobody."  And I am not inclined to
>>>second-guess the experts on that point.
>>>Incompatible changes in HTML are generally not going to be considered
>>>outside the XHTML 2.0 activity, as it is risky to think with the heavy use
>>>of HTML all the time that any incompatible changes will be taken up in
>>>practice, even with the best efforts of the HTML WG.
>>>XHTML 2.0 is the version that HTML WG is working on.  We would have to have
>>>a flaming disaster going on to get an incompatible change released as some
>>>sort of an interim patch, and it is not clear who would implement it.
>>>Besides, there are too many, too good, ways to do this in ways that
>>>interoperate with HTML 2.0.
>>>There is also a plugin option for the browser extension.  Also an
>>>independent screen scraper like Atomica.
>>So, at least, for the "previous" version all we can do is to "hope" to
>>have - for example - intelligent text readers that read the words in the
>>natural language...
>>Roberto Scano
>>IWA/HWG EMEA Coordinator
>>W3C Advisory Committee Representative for IWA/HWG
>>International Webmasters Association / HTML Writers Guild
>> -
>>E-Mail: -

Charles McCathieNevile  tel: +61 409 134 136
SWAD-E         fax(france): +33 4 92 38 78 22
 Post:   21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia    or
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Friday, 14 March 2003 07:44:26 UTC