[annotator-dev] Open Annotation support in Annotator

Greg Pendlebury greg.pendlebury at gmail.com
Sun Oct 12 20:57:57 UTC 2014

Random 2c contribution. Is there something wrong with allowing both?

{ "oa:annotatedBy" : {"dc:id" : "http://server.net/people/handle",
"foaf:nick" : "handle" } }

I'm making up field names there, but the structure is what I mean. We do
this because the annotation is meant to be a digital object unto itself and
we would like it to carry all the data required to degrade gracefully at
display time.

If it ends up in a UI that understands the ID component we can be very rich
in our display, but other UIs can at least put a simple string literal on


On 11 October 2014 08:17, Randall Leeds <tilgovi at hypothes.is> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi Ben, Randall,
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Benjamin Young <bigbluehat at hypothes.is>
>>  wrote:
>>> > 2.  User holds the user name of the account, and thus the appropriate
>>>> mapping is foaf:nick
>>>> >For our use at Hypothesis, the user field is a URI, not a string
>>>> literal representing a foaf:nick.
>>> Could the value of oa:annotatedBy not directly be the user URI in this
>>> case?
>>> "The object of the [oa:annotatedBy] relationship is a resource that
>>> identifies the agent responsible for creating the Annotation."
>>> Is that overly simplified?
>> Yes, it could be ... and indeed that would be exactly what the model
>> expects.
>> The distinction would be between:
>>     { "oa:annotatedBy" : "http://server.net/people/handle" }
>> and:
>>     { "oa:annotatedBy" : {"foaf:nick" : "handle" } }
>> Where the first is clearly globally unique, and the second is dependent
>> on the user list of whichever system is managing the 'handle' user.
>> It'd be great if this was able to be relied upon in Annotator 2.0?  Or is
>> that asking too much? :)
> I think I'm not understanding the ask.
> What I thought you were asking was for Annotator 2.0 to always assume the
> foaf:nick case and to serialize things that way.
> What I'm asking is for Annotator 2.0 not to take a stance on the presence
> or absence of an annotatedBy relation or whether its r-value is inlined or
> a URI and what its properties are.
> _______________________________________________
> annotator-dev mailing list
> annotator-dev at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/annotator-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/annotator-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/annotator-dev/attachments/20141013/6d05e1b5/attachment-0004.html>

More information about the annotator-dev mailing list