- From: Jose Kahan <jose.kahan@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 14:43:20 +0200
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: www-annotation@w3.org
Hello Sean, [About merging EARL and annotea] Thanks for your message. I browsed the EARL URLs you gave me. I think that what you are requesting is a way to be able to use structured annotations in Annotea. IMO, Merging EARL with Annotea would require having an RDF object of type EARL or some other type that would include some or most of the Annotea properties, as well as the EARL properties. See it as an annotation whose type is described with EARL. It's very use to combine properties from different RDF schemas. We are currently working on adding discussion threads to Annotea and that's what we just did. This didn't require any change on the server side, because we're using a generic RDF dbase. WE may have to add a new protocol query to make a more optimized query for threads, but that would be a minor change. Most of the work has been on the client side, where we had had to make Amaya be able to interpret the semantics of threads. Note that adding new RDF properties won't break other Annotea clients which are based on an RDF parsers. That's because they would just ignore the properties they don't know anything about (they should save those properties back to the server if they want to save a modification of some properties, though.) One thing we had been talking about is to be able to show RDF properties that we don't know how to interpret. That would mean that we could browse the EARL properties for a given resource, but, as we wouldn't know the semantics, we couldn't modify them or attach new properties. In the long term, it would be nice to use an Annotea client to be able to attach any kind of RDF property, but we are not there yet. Another thing about EARL... as far as I understood, you're considering storing the EARL reports on-line. I think you should also consider just sending them back to the user. For example, you submit a page to a WAI validator and get back an automatic report consisting of a list of annotations that link parts of the page to some WAI guidelines, that explains where they are WAI problems. The report only exists in the answer from the WAI validator. This is interesting because if you modify the page to enhance its WAI aspects, some of the annotations would not be valid anymore. If you store the report on-line, it would become quickly obsolete. Of course, my reply here isn't the absolute, definitive reply :) Comments, flames, and feedback are welcome. -jose
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 08:43:41 UTC