Re: Annotation software comparisons

At 10:30 AM EDT Jakob Hummes wrote:

> Jon, you might want to take a look on an earlier comparison between
> various annotation systems. 

Thanks, your paper is proving quite useful.

At 12:18 AM EDT Ka Ping Yee wrote:
>Hi.  I like your taxonomy.  It's nicely organized.  You may wish to
>add a row to your table for Laurent Denoue's "YAWAS", mentioned on
>this list a little while ago.
> http://crit.org/http://look.boston.ma.us/garf/webdev/annote/software.html

Yes, your comments are useful as well, I am working on them. Now I have a
better idea what ought to be in this draft. I should finish some major
revisions within the week.

>> Unfortunately, no one is trying to get at the
>> heart of the problem, which is the software's faulty architecture.
>
>By that, do you mean the fact that it uses a root note server?

Yes. Their architecture does not suggest a multiplicity of servers.

Perhaps I should not these web armchair critics so seriously, given that
they seem to be of the same cut of technically-proficient people who
protested popular standards:{cookies, frames, PICS} due to paranoid reasoning.

Nonetheless I cannot help but think that we'd be better off if ThirdVoice
were involved in this discussion, and somewhere on the path towards
standardization.

Note, to take a break from 3rdVoice, I was very much interested in the
"dictionary-based" anchoring method that RichLink offers. I think it will
come naturally with XML, though. 

Jon

"Death and danger are my various breads and various butters." -- Woody Allen

Jon Garfunkel .......................... phone 781-262-4797
Software Engineer ...................... Burlington Office 25/2020E
VPN Advantage .......................... 	https://nes-web/people/jgarfunk
GTE Internetworking /Powered By BBN/ .....................................

Received on Tuesday, 15 June 1999 00:28:20 UTC