- From: Laurent Denoue <Denoue@fxpal.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 10:53:53 -0700
- To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-annotation@w3.org>
I share your concerns about different and incompatible annotation systems. But I think that the W3C is doing a good job with their Annotea prototypes. Furthermore, with XML and RDF it becomes easier to modify our own annotation systems to talk to other systems. When I asked about what kind of services you would like added on top of the basic annotation system, I hadn't thought about threading and authentication. This is mainly because I currently stay in scenarios where people create personal annotations. I know that the Internet lets us easily share all these annotations, but for now I am more interested in supporting individuals. The approach I try is: - first build a system useful to the individual so that it gets used - then see what I can do with the generated data for a group of people So when I asked about services on top of annotation systems, I thought about - automatic classification - easier retrieval - ... using the annotations you did on documents (e.g. web pages and emails). If people have ideas, please let me know! Laurent. > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org] > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 7:37 AM > To: Laurent Denoue > Cc: www-annotation@w3.org > Subject: RE: email annotation > > > Well, for most mail (but not Yahoo I suspect) the msgid is > readily available > and can be used in existing systems. This provides > interoperability with > other annotation tools - there is nothing more frustrating > than having two > different and incompatible annotation systems. > > A hash over the page has some advantages - you know if > something has changed. > On the other hand that makes it difficult to maintain > annotations when a page > changes - although this happens less often with mail messages > (very few > people edit their archived email) it is important for a > system that works for > both web pages and email in the same way. > > I would need to see some real benefit over existing free > systems before I > would pay for such a tool (well, before I would pay more than > shareware > prices anyway). I am not sure what I would like to see on top > of it - the > sort of things that I would like on top of web annotations - > threading, > authentication, a powerful access control system so I could > let certain > people annotate or give access to certain messages or annotations, ... > > cheers > > Chaals > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Laurent Denoue wrote: > > >Salut Charles, > > > >It's a good idea to use archives since we can leverage > existing Web annotation systems. > >In fact, this would also work for Web-based email clients > like Yahoo!Mail. > > > >I developped a prototype in the spirit of Yawas: a very > light tool to highlight > >outlook emails in your inbox. Sorry: only Outlook, only > Windows :( but it's good to test ideas out. > > > >It does not modify the original messages of course: it > simply dynamically highlights them when > >the user previews them in outlook. > > > >To solve the problem of keys for documents, I currently use > a signature of each email. > >It is computed by simply summing all characters in the > email. It has been working very well for the last 2 months on > my emails. > > > >Using a signature of the CONTENT itself is very robust: if > you move your email to a different folder, the program is > still able to dynamically remap the annotations. > > > >Quick poll 1: Would anybody pay for such a tool? > >Quick poll 2: What services would you like plugged on top of it? > > > >Laurent. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org] > >> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 5:43 AM > >> To: Laurent Denoue > >> Cc: www-annotation@w3.org > >> Subject: Re: email annotation > >> > >> > >> Well, at W3C we archive our email lists on the Web. This > means you can > >> annotate those. You could also annotate by the message id > >> that each email > >> has. > >> > >> Although we can use that as a key into our archive, as far > as I know > >> there is no reliable way of finding an email mesage that was > >> sent based on > >> its message-id (happily enough, since most email is > >> personal). But I don't > >> think that's really a problem for most use cases - if you > >> take an annotea > >> approach then anyone who has the email can find the id in the > >> header and > >> query for an annotation - usually that means the sender and > >> recipient(s). > >> > >> cheers > >> > >> Chaals > >> > >> On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Laurent Denoue wrote: > >> > >> >Hello, > >> > > >> >Does anybody know of a program to annotate emails? > >> >Web annotations systems are popular, but emails are also a > >> very big source of online reading so it would make sense to > >> have such a tool. > >> > > >> >Laurent. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles > >> tel: +61 409 134 136 > >> SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI > >http://www.w3.org/WAI > > 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia fax(fr): > +33 4 92 38 78 22 > > W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France > > > > -- > Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles > tel: +61 409 134 136 > SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI http://www.w3.org/WAI 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 13:54:06 UTC