- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:12:49 -0500 (EST)
- To: Jose Kahan <jose.kahan@w3.org>
- cc: Reto Bachmann-Gmuer <reto@gmuer.ch>, Damian Fernandez Perez <damian@cs.toronto.edu>, <www-annotation@w3.org>
So are replies a subtype of annotation (or should they be?) which have a specific treatment in Amaya, and for which there is a recommendation that the thread of replies is made available in presenting the annotations? I realise that there are not 'requirements' on how user agents should present annotations to users, but it might be worthwhile discussing what are appropriate ways to present the basic barts of the core protocols (e.g. that a:annotations are expected to be simple annotations, and replies are intended to be threaded...) ? cheers Chaals On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Jose Kahan wrote: > >Hello Reto, > >On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 07:11:23PM +0100, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote: > >> I didn't yet try to implement the reply protocol. To be honest I don't >> understand the need for this, why not just annotate annotations? > >Nothing keeps you from annotation an annotation. An annotation is >a resource and it has a URL. We support this in Amaya since long time >ago. > >You can see an annotation as a way of making a remark about something. >A reply allows people to respond to those remarks. This is similar >to what we have on email. The reply threads allow you to better >organize the discussion and visualize it.
Received on Monday, 3 March 2003 11:12:56 UTC