- From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 18:59:39 -0000
- To: <www-annotation@w3.org>
Hi, One thing I want to do with Annotea, is annotate resources other than *ML pages, in particular images. SVG paths and drawings seem to be the obvious way of doing having the actual annotation information, but what's a good way of storing it in Annotea? I see two options for that, either simply providing a a:body of content-type image/svg+xml which then any Annotea can just query - the advantage of this is the simplicity of doing it and extending existing clients (they just have to display the SVG document, no processing needed.) In fact, I've already done this, if you look at the annotations on http://jibbering.com/imgs/shepherds.jpg you'll see they include http://annotest.w3.org/annotations/body/1016716304.319541 . Amaya doesn't try to get annotations on image content-type urls, Snufkin displays a link to the SVG and reports the content-type, and Annozilla won't install on my 0.9.8 [*] The other alternative is for the Annotations to be in RDF, and the SVG then generated from this RDF, this will give better flexibility in the display, and allow for annotations to be combined, however the parsing will be more complicated - http://jibbering.com/svg/AnnotateImage.html has an image annotation tool in SVG which generates RDF and SVG type annotations. My thoughts on what the RDF might look like is in http://jibbering.com/2002/3/samplesvg.rdf (http://jibbering.com/rdf/foafwho.html already parses something similar.) This would also mean you could have the body containing non-svg'd annotation for those clients without SVG support. My questions are. Is this a reasonable use of Annotea? What do you think is the better idea, SVG content-Type, or RDF ones? Cheers, Jim. [*] I'm prompted to download chrome://annozilla/content/addpanel.xul, rather than Mozilla executing it, so it never appears in the sidepanel which I assume is essential.
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 14:02:29 UTC