https://web.hypothes.is/help/annotating-youtube-videos-with-the-hypothesis-lms-app/

Walkthrough for how to add YouTube Videos into LMS assignments for annotation with H.

https://hypothes.is/users/msallegra

https://jamesg.blog/2022/12/30/highlight-js/

https://www.zylstra.org/blog/2022/09/10-thoughts-after-100-annotations-in-hypothes-is/

I love that you've got a comments heading for Hypothes.is annotations on your post @tonz! This is awesome.

https://www.zylstra.org/blog/2022/08/added-hypothes-is-annotations-link-to-posts/

Also... just to show the functionality. (aka: First!)

https://reclipped.com/

• [ ] Reminder to check out video annotations using Reclipped

<small><cite class='h-cite via'>ᔥ <span class='p-author h-card'> Jan Knorr</span> in "@reclipped seems to be the best video annotating tool at the moment. It reminds me of @hypothes_is a lot. @ChrisAldrich what do you think about it as a https://t.co/iEahoO0Cly power user? How do you annotate videos? https://t.co/DP7WFaDKd9" / Twitter (<time class='dt-published'>11/16/2022 13:46:27</time>)</cite></small>

https://web.hypothes.is/blog/celebrating-nearly-40-million-annotations

Or annotate it right now: https://docdrop.org/pdf/Are-Your-Students-Doing-the-Rea---Hypothes.is-gaulj.pdf/

Has it already been that long?!

Apparently my account dates to January 18, 2012, so I apparently missed an important anniversary.

Hypothes.is tools<br /> https://jonudell.info/h/tools.html

facet tools<br /> copy annotations<br /> tag rename<br /> annotation powered survey<br /> pagefit

https://www.mattmaldre.com/2021/09/13/annotate-articles-online/

I love that Matt is using this tool and his annotated notes to write new material based on things he's read.

For those curious about the idea of what students might do with the notes and annotations they're making in the margins of their texts using Hypothes.is, I would submit that Dan Allosso's OER handbook How to Make Notes and Write (Minnesota State Pressbooks, 2022) may be a very useful place to turn. https://minnstate.pressbooks.pub/write/

It provides some concrete advice on the topic of once you've highlighted and annotated various texts for a course, how might you then turn your new understanding, ideas, and extant thinking work into a blogpost, essay, term paper or thesis.

For a similar, but alternative take, the book How to Take Smart Notes: One Simple Technique to Boost Writing, Learning and Thinking by Sönke Ahrens (Create Space, 2017) may also be helpful as well. This text however requires purchase via Amazon and doesn't carry the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike (by-nc-sa 4.0) license that Dr. Allosso's does.

In addition to the online copy of the book, there's an annotatable .pdf copy available here: http://docdrop.org/pdf/How-to-Make-Notes-and-Write---Allosso-Dan-jzdq8.pdf/ though one can download .epub and .pdf copies directly from the Pressbooks site.

https://web.hypothes.is/blog/back-to-school-with-annotation-10-ways-to-annotate-with-students/

Jeremy Dean indicates that marginal notes are often "the basis for [...] points made in a final paper", but I wonder how frequently this is the case in the computer era? I rarely see or hear of educators encouraging the reuse of marginalia or even notes in academic settings, even within the framing of Hypothes.is which is an ideal tool for such a practice.

It's been my experience that while notes are in margins, they tend to sit there lonely and unused. Few are actually creating content based on them. When this is the case, memory of the idea or issue at hand is necessary so that it may be looked up and transcribed back into a bigger piece. When it does happen it's also far more likely to be academic writers or researchers who are concertedly building up particular areas. It's much less likely to be high school or undergraduate college students who should have picked up the practice earlier in junior high school or even elementary school so that their school research years are easier.

A potential resurgence of this broader practice may be coming back into vogue with the slew of new note taking apps that have been popping up and the idea of the zettelkasten coming back into a broader consciousness.

http://www.americanyawp.com/

Apparently this is one of the most annotated texts within Hypothes.is. Interestingly, almost none of the annotations on it are public.

The course Marginalia in Books from Christopher Ohge is just crying out to have an annotated syllabus.

Wish I could follow along directly, but there's some excellent reference material hiding in the brief outline of the course.

Perhaps a list of interesting people here too for speaking at https://iannotate.org/ 2022 hiding in here? A session on the history of annotation and marginalia could be cool there.

An interesting list of readings on annotation.

I'm curious if anyone has an open Zotero bibliography for this area? https://www.zotero.org/search/?p=2&q=annotation&type=group

of which the following look interesting: - https://www.zotero.org/groups/2586310/annotation - https://www.zotero.org/groups/2423071/annotated - https://www.zotero.org/groups/2898045/social_annotation

This reminds me to revisit Zocurelia as well: https://zocurelia.com

http://jonudell.info/h/zotero/

This tool reads your Zotero library, finds items imported by URL, looks for associated Hypothesis annotations, and syncs them to Zotero as child notes.

This is an intriguing off-label use case for Hypothes.is which is within the realm of peer-review use cases.

Dan is essentially using the idea of annotation as engagement within a textbook as a means of proactively improving it. He's mentioned it before in Hypothes.is Social (and Private) Annotation.

Because one can actively see the gaps without readers necessarily being aware of their "review", this may be a far better method than asking for active reviews of materials.

Reviewers are probably not as likely to actively mark sections they don't find engaging. Has anyone done research on this space for better improving texts? Certainly annotation provides a means for helping to do this.

6 Craig Mod, “Post-Artifact Books and Publishing,” craigmod.com, June 2011, https://craigmod.com/journal/post_artifact/.

It's not just me... I might hope that someone could leverage Hypothes.is' product to create a more explicit digital commonplace book out of their product.

Some scholars study annotations as part of material culture. Are they leaving out too much by solely studying those physically left in the books about which they were made, or should we instead also be looking at other sources like commonplace books, notebooks, note cards, digital spaces like e-readers that allow annotation, social media where texts are discussed, or even digital marginalia in services like Hypothes.is or Perusall?

Some of these forms of annotation allow a digital version of cut and paste which doesn't cause damage to the original text, which should be thought of as a good thing though it may separate the annotations from the original physical object.

This is a great question and I ask it frequently with many different answers.

I've not seen specific numbers, but I suspect that the majority of Hypothes.is users are annotating in small private groups/classes using their learning management system (LMS) integrations through their university. As a result, using it and hoping for a big social experience is going to be discouraging for most.

Of course this doesn't mean that no one is out there. After all, here you are following my RSS feed of annotations and asking these questions!

I'd say that 95+% or more of my annotations are ultimately for my own learning and ends. If others stumble upon them and find them interesting, then great! But I'm not really here for them.

As more people have begun using Hypothes.is over the past few years I have slowly but surely run into people hiding in the margins of texts and quietly interacted with them and begun to know some of them. Often they're also on Twitter or have their own websites too which only adds to the social glue. It has been one of the slowest social media experiences I've ever had (even in comparison to old school blogging where discovery is much higher in general use). There has been a small uptick (anecdotally) in Hypothes.is use by some in the note taking application space (Obsidian, Roam Research, Logseq, etc.), so I've seen some of them from time to time.

I can only think of one time in the last five or so years in which I happened to be "in a text" and a total stranger was coincidentally reading and annotating at the same time. There have been a few times I've specifically been in a shared text with a small group annotating simultaneously. Other than this it's all been asynchronous experiences.

There are a few people working at some of the social side of Hypothes.is if you're searching for it, though even their Hypothes.is presences may seem as sparse as your own at present @tonz.

Some examples:

@peterhagen Has built an alternate interface for the main Hypothes.is feed that adds some additional discovery dimensions you might find interesting. It highlights some frequent annotators and provide a more visual feed of what's happening on the public Hypothes.is timeline as well as data from HackerNews.

@flancian maintains anagora.org, which is like a planet of wikis and related applications, where he keeps a list of annotations on Hypothes.is by members of the collective at https://anagora.org/latest

@tomcritchlow has experimented with using Hypothes.is as a "traditional" comments section on his personal website.

@remikalir has a nice little tool https://crowdlaaers.org/ for looking at documents with lots of annotations.

Right now, I'm also in an Obsidian-based book club run by Dan Allosso in which some of us are actively annotating the two books using Hypothes.is and dovetailing some of this with activity in a shared Obsidian vault. see: https://boffosocko.com/2022/03/24/55803196/. While there is a small private group for our annotations a few of us are still annotating the books in public. Perhaps if I had a group of people who were heavily interested in keeping a group going on a regular basis, I might find the value in it, but until then public is better and I'm more likely to come across and see more of what's happening out there.

I've got a collection of odd Hypothes.is related quirks, off label use cases, and experiments: https://boffosocko.com/tag/hypothes.is/ including a list of those I frequently follow: https://boffosocko.com/about/following/#Hypothesis%20Feeds

Like good annotations and notes, you've got to put some work into finding the social portion what's happening in this fun little space. My best recommendation to find your "tribe" is to do some targeted tag searches in their search box to see who's annotating things in which you're interested.

https://hypothes.is/a/krnfMl0pEeyvKGMTU02-Lw

stuhlmueller Dec 14, 2021

Elicit co-founder here - feel free to leave feedback through hypothesis, we're reading it. :)

Example in the wild of a company using Hypothes.is to elicit (pun intended) feedback on their product.

Stages of annotation in the medieval period

When is Hypothes.is going to branch out into the business of professional readers to add aids to texts?! :)

Link this to the professional summary industry that reads books and summarizes them for busy executives

Link this to the annotations studied by Owen Gingerich in The Book Nobody Read.

Brandon,

Obsidian Annotator (https://github.com/elias-sundqvist/obsidian-annotator), which I'm presuming you're using, looks like it's working from within Obsidian instead of a web page and is very clever looking, but without some significant work, I don't think it's going to provide you with the results you're looking for. It sounds like you want an all-public chain of work and Obsidian Annotator currently defaults to an all-private chain.

From my brief perusal of what's going on, the plugin appears to be tied to a single Hypothes.is account (likely the developer's) which defaults all annotations to private (only you) and as a result, even if you had the permalink to the annotations you'd not be able to see them presented on the web as they're all private and you wouldn't have access to the account. You could try filing some issues on the related Github repository to see if the developer might add the ability to make public annotations using your own personal account, which I'm sure would require your personal API key for Hypothes.is to be put into the settings page for the plugin in Obsidian. Another issue I see is that it's taking Hypothesis tags and turning them into Obsidian tags, which is generally fine, but the developer isn't accounting for multi-word tags which is creating unintended tag errors along the way that will need to be manually fixed.

If you're open to an alternate method of annotating and doing so in public, I can recommend a workflow that will allow you to do what it sounds like you're attempting. It starts with annotating .pdf files (either on the web, or as local files in your browser) in public using your own Hypothes.is account. (Most of this also works with private annotations, but if you want them to appear on public versions of web-hosted .pdf files with the same fingerprints, you'll want them to be public so others can see/interact with them.) Next set up the Hypothesidian script described here: https://forum.obsidian.md/t/retrieve-annotations-for-hypothes-is-via-templater-plugin-hypothes-idian/17225. There are some useful hints further down the thread on that page, so read the whole thing. The Github repository for it is here: https://github.com/SilentVoid13/Templater/discussions/191 if you need it. I've documented a few modifications I've made to the built-in template to suit my particular needs and which might serve as a template if you find it useful: https://boffosocko.com/2021/07/08/hypothes-is-obsidian-hypothesidian-for-easier-note-taking-and-formatting/.

You can then use the functionality of Hypothesidian to pull in the annotations you want (by day, by document, only your annotations, all the annotations on a document, etc.) For .pdf files, you may require Jon Udell's facet tool https://jonudell.info/h/facet/ to search your personal account for the name of the file or one of the tags you used. When you find it, you can click on it and it will open a new browser window that contains the appropriate urn file "key" you'll need to put into Hypothesidian to grab the annotations from a particular .pdf file. It will be in the general form: urn:x-pdf:1234abcd5678efgh9101112ijkl13. I haven't found an easier means of pulling out the URN/fingerprint of pdf files, though others may have ideas.

When you pull in your annotations you can also get/find permalinks to the annotations on the web if you like. I usually hide mine in the footnotes of pages with the labels "annotation in situ" and "syndication links", a habit I've picked up from the IndieWeb community (https://indieweb.org/posts-elsewhere). You can see a sample of how this might be done at https://notes.boffosocko.com/where-are-the-empty-spaces-on-the-internet where I've been doing some small scale Hypothes.is/Obsidian/Web experiments. (I'm currently using Blot.im to get [[wikilinks]] to resolve.)

Another strong option you're probably looking for is to use "via" links (https://web.hypothes.is/blog/meetvia/) on the URLs for your pdf files so that people can automatically see the annotation layer. (This may require whitelisting on Hypothes.is' end depending on where the files are hosted; alternately https://docdrop.org/ may be useful here.) Then if you've annotated those publicly, they'll also be able to see them that way too.

Another side benefit of this method is that it doesn't require the Data View plugin for Obsidian to render your annotations within Obsidian which also means you'll have cleaner looking pages of annotations in your web published versions. (ie. none of the %% code blocks which don't render properly on the web)

As I notice you're using some scanned .pdf files which often don't have proper OCR and can make creating annotations with appropriate Hypothes.is anchors, you might also appreciate the functionality of docdrop for this as well.

Given your reliance on documents and the fact that you've annotated some in what looks like Adobe Acrobat or a similar .pdf program, you might additionally enjoy using Zotero with Obsidian, Zotfile, and mdnotes as outlined here: https://forum.obsidian.md/t/zotero-zotfile-mdnotes-obsidian-dataview-workflow/15536. It's relatively slick, but requires additional set up, reliance on more moving pieces, and isn't as nice an overall user interface in comparison to Hypothes.is. It also misses all of the potential useful social annotation you might get with Hypothes.is.

Hopefully this is all reasonably clear and helpful. I'd be interested in hearing about options from others who are using Hypothes.is in conjunction with Obsidian or other related note taking tools and publishing them to the web after-the-fact.

Best, Chris Aldrich

Should active reading, thinking, and annotating also include making gestures as a means of providing more clear reasoning, and drawing better inferences from one's material?

Would gestural movements with a hand or physical writing be helpful in annotation over digital annotation using typing as an input? Is this related to the anecdotal evidence/research of handwriting being a better method of note taking over typing?

Could products like Hypothes.is or Diigo benefit from the use of digital pens on screens as a means of improving learning over using a mouse and a keyboard to highlight and annotate?

Nice to see someone speaking so joyously about annotations. :) Looks like you've got a heavier analog version of the digital version of what I'm doing. I often use Kindle hightlights/annotations and then import them to Obsidian. Alternately I use Hypothes.is on online .pdf copies and then use Hypothesidian (https://forum.obsidian.md/t/retrieve-annotations-for-hypothes-is-via-templater-plugin-hypothes-idian/17225) to import all my digital notes into Obsidian. I love being able to keep the original context of the text close for either creating literature notes or expanding fleeting notes into permanent ones. When I am in a more analog mode (who doesn't love the feel of a nice fountain pen on paper?) I have a method for doing optical character recognition on my handwritten notes to save the time of typing them out again: https://boffosocko.com/2021/12/20/55799844/

https://www.fermatslibrary.com/margins

A tool for creating and sharing marginalia. Geared toward the education space, but has relatively limited UI and isn't as feature rich as Hypothes.is.

https://annotations.lindylearn.io/

What a great UI for annotations on Hypothes.is and Hacker News.

I wonder if this is pulling data from the public Hypothesis API? What triggers inclusion into the lists?

Using Hypothes.is as an annotation layer for internal company notes in a private space could be an interesting way for easing on-boarding.

In some sense, this is a little bit of what the annotated syllabus is doing for students at the beginning of a course (in addition to helping to onboard them to the idea of social annotation at the same time.)

https://www.amazon.com/Marginalia-Paper-Very-Margin-Notebook/dp/192689202X/

Marginalia Paper, you know, for annotating your own writing...

A must-have for the Hypothes.is fan who wants to go the hipster route.

https://via.hypothes.is/https://www.edutopia.org/article/social-annotation-digital-age

a teaser article for social annotation. only scratches the surface.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f86L7vgHUW9wSLNNSunhjmtxtg6KlCOVpHGKbqUzW-Y/edit#gid=0

Hypothes.is Historical Survey of Annotation Efforts

https://jrdingwall.ca/blogwall/25-years-of-ed-tech-blogs/

JR writes about some of his journey into blogging.

I appreciate some of the last part about the 9x9x25 blogs. For JR it seems like some smaller prompts got him into more regular writing.

He mentions Stephen Downes regular workflow as well. I think mine is fairly similar to Stephen's. To some extent, I write much more on my own website now than I ever had before. This is because I post a lot more frequently to my own site, in part because it's just so easy to do. I'll bookmark things or post about what I've recently read or watched. My short commentary on some of these is just that, short commentary. But occasionally I discover, depending on the subject, that those short notes and bookmark posts will spring into something bigger or larger. Sometimes it's a handful of small posts over a few days or weeks that ultimately inspires the longer thing. The key seems to be to write something.

Perhaps a snowball analogy will work. I take a tiny snowball and give it a proverbial roll. Sometimes it sits there and other times it rolls down the hill and turns into a much larger snowball. Other times I get a group of them and build a full snowman.

Of course lately a lot of my writing starts, like this did, as an annotation (using Hypothes.is) to something I was reading. It then posts to my website with some context and we're off to the races.

Some people consider annotations to be a conversation with the author. But you're also having a conversation with yourself and your own thoughts. (Cross reference Niklas Luhmann's having a conversation with himself via his notes.)

Further, there are platforms like Hypothes.is or social platforms like Twitter where you can move the conversation out of the page and engage with others. However, for this Hypothes.is has more power because it keeps the conversation linked to the original text and the original context (which I'll explicitly translate here as "with the text") to underline the point.

cf:

cum (Latin) : with

textus (Latin) : tissue, web, texture, fabric, connection, language

contextus (Latin) : context, connection, coherence, connexion, coherency, text

Testing out the OCR functionality of docdrop.org.

I'm noticing that the pdf fingerprint of this text somehow matches that of other texts as there are a lot of non-related annotations on this page.

Is docdrop doing something squirrelly with the fingerprint @dwhly?

An awesome looking annotation tool that dovetails with Zotero to invite students and readers into texts with annotations.

Demonstrated by Axel Dürkop at the Social Hour: Annotate This Party With Annotation Show-and-Tell

There is definitely an art to writing interesting marginalia however. Perhaps something that requires practice?

Sam Anderson's would be intriguing I'm sure. Dick Macksey's marvelous. Anderson provides the example of people wanting books from [[Samuel Taylor Coleridge]] earlier in the piece.

I can only contrast this with some of the crazy minutiae an pedantry I've seen on Hypothes.is which makes me think that it's surely an art form.

I suspect some of it is that I'm missing the personal context with a particular person---a sense of continuity. Things get even worse when it's a piece annotated by a class which can create a cacophony of annotations. I see far too many "me too" annotations floating around in the margins that don't add anything to the conversation. (Hopefully I'm not guilty of this sin myself, but really, even my public annotations are a conversation between me and a piece and are only for my own benefit.)

This could be an interesting service to set up and run.

I wonder if I could set up a private Hypothes.is group and actually charge a club rate to members for doing such a thing?

Goofy as this physical version sounds, I could imagine a digital overlay version that could go along with digital books in much the same way that Google Maps has digital overlays.

The problem lies with registration and location of words to do the overlay properly. The UI would also be a major bear.

Hypothes.is has really done a spectacular job in their version, the only issue is that it requires doing it all in a browser and isn't easily usable in any e-readers.

Computer and phone notifications can be insidious. I've personally turned most of them off.

I also find that reading and annotating with Hypothes.is has helped me to have more focus while reading---even despite the short turnoffs to cogitate a bit, write a bit, and then return.

This is a fun and curious bit of UI here relating to Hypothes.is. There's an icon/button with a link to open the via interface and it auto updates with each additional annotation.

I'd like to look into how they implemented it and potentially add it as a social sort of feature to my own site.

This looks like the sort of project that @judell @dwhly @remikalir and the Hypothes.is team may appreciate, if nothing else but for the user interface set up and interactions.

I'll have to spin up a copy shortly to take a look under the hood.

<small><cite class='h-cite via'>ᔥ <span class='p-author h-card'>Remi Kalir & Jeremy Dean</span> in Web Annotation as Conversation and Interruption (<time class='dt-published'>03/15/2021 00:21:05</time>)</cite></small>

I've run into this issue myself in a few public instances. I look at my annotations as my own "conversation" with a document. Given this, I usually flip the switch to hide all the annotations on the page and annotate for myself. Afterwards I'll then turn the annotation view back on and see and potentially interact with others if I choose.

I know I've come across this and used it before, but somehow I managed not to bookmark it.

Good overview of annotation tools with a lot of additional information in comments and - you guess - annotations.

I do much this same thing, however, I'm typically doing it using Hypothes.is to annotate and highlight. These pieces go back to my own website where I can keep, categorize, and even later search them. If I like, I'll often do these sorts of summaries on related posts themselves (usually before I post them publicly if that's something I'm planning on doing for a particular piece.)

The IndieWebCamp.com site lists a small handful of people with Hypothes.is affiliations who had websites, but none of the seem to be active any longer. Perhaps we can track some of them down via twitter?

I find it somewhat interesting to note that with 246 public annotations on this page using Hypothes.is, that from what I can tell as of 4/2/2019 only one of them is a simple highlight. All the rest are highlights with an annotation or response of some sort.

It makes me curious to know what the percentage distribution these two types have on the platform. Is it the case that in classroom settings, which many of these annotations appear to have been made, that much of the use of the platform dictates more annotations (versus simple highlights) due to the performative nature of the process?

Is it possible that there are a significant number of highlights which are simply hidden because the platform automatically defaults these to private? Is the friction of making highlights so high that people don't bother?

I know that Amazon will indicate heavily highlighted passages in e-books as a feature to draw attention to the interest relating to those passages. Perhaps it would be useful/nice if Hypothes.is would do something similar, but make the author of the highlights anonymous? (From a privacy perspective, this may not work well on articles with a small number of annotators as the presumption could be that the "private" highlights would most likely be directly attributed to those who also made public annotations.

Perhaps the better solution is to default highlights to public and provide friction-free UI to make them private?

A heavily highlighted section by a broad community can be a valuable thing, but surfacing it can be a difficult thing to do.

I think that a major part of improving the issue of abuse and providing consent is building in notifications so that website owners will at least be aware that their site is being marked up, highlighted, annotated, and commented on in other locations or by other platforms. Then the site owner at least has the knowledge of what's happening and can then be potentially provided with information and tools to allow/disallow such interactions, particularly if they can block individual bad actors, but still support positive additions, thought, and communication. Ideally this blocking wouldn't occur site wide, which many may be tempted to do now as a knee-jerk reaction to recent events, but would be fine grained enough to filter out the worst offenders.

Toward the end of notifications to site owners, it would be great if any annotating activity would trigger trackbacks, pingbacks, or the relatively newer and better webmention protocol of the WW3C out of the http://IndieWebCamp.com movement. Then site owners would at least have notifications about what is happening on their site that might otherwise be invisible to them.

Perhaps there's a way to further implement filters or tools (a la Akismet on platforms like WordPress) that allow site users to mark materials as spam, abusive, or other so that they are then potentially moved from "public" facing to "private" so that the original highlighter can still see their notes, but that the platform isn't allowing the person's own website to act as a platform to give reach to bad actors.

Further some site owners might appreciate graded filters (G, PG, PG-13, R, X) so that users or even parents can filter what they're willing to see. Consider also annotations on narrative forms that might be posted as spoilers--how can these be guarded against? (Possibly with CSS and a spoiler tag?) Options can be built into the platform itself as well as allowing server-side options for truly hard cases.

My coding skills are rustier than I wish they were, but I'm available to help/consult if needed.

Turns out that because it's text-based, you can also annotate it with Hypothes.is!

Wait? What!? I've been wanting to be able to follow users annotations and I'd love the ability to monitor site annotations!! (I've even suggested that they added Webmention before to do direct notifications for site annotations.)

Where have you seen these things hiding Tom?

Does the script Audrey Watters is using really stop people from annotating her site directly?

Based on my quick test, one can still (carefully) use Hypothes.is to highlight and annotate her site, but the script at least prevents Hypothes.is from showing that annotation. When visiting her site with Hypothes.is' Chrome browser extension on, it does show that there is one annotation on the page. It then requires some hunting to find this comment.

I'm wondering if the NY Times used the summit to figure out how to prevent annotating at all? Somehow I'm not able to reasonably use either Hypothes.is or Genius with it in multiple browsers.

In particular I just can't highlight anything on the page, and attempts usually end up moving me to a new article. Blech!

Posting this solely to compare my Hypothes.is highlights and annotations on my website with Will's version.

I'm still tinkering with mine and should have a Micropub based version using IFTTT and Webhooks done soon.

While I'm reading this, I can't help but wishing that Hypothes.is would add a redaction functionality to their product. They could potentially effect it by using the highlighter functionality, but changing the CSS to have the color shown be the same as that of the (body) text instead of being yellow.

Manuel Espinoza, “Keynote,” AnnotatED Summit, April 2, 2018, https://youtu.be/5LNmSjDHipM.

John, you should spend a minute or two to learn about Hypothes.is (https://web.hypothes.is/) as an online tool for doing this. It's a free account or you can self-host the software yourself if you like. There are also functionalities to have public, private, or group annotations. I often pull my own annotations to my personal website similar to your own Memex and publish them there (example: https://boffosocko.com/kind/annotation/)

Syndicated copy: https://boffosocko.com/2020/05/21/55771248/)

If you see this annotation, you have annotations up and running :)

This is interesting, since the opening video for https://hypothes.is/ mentions the early web also - in this case, for its annotation features that were removed.

It seems to me that hypothes.is is even more powerful used on IPFS content identified by hash since that underlying content cannot change.

Thanks to both services I'm doing exactly this right now!

And searching the web in general; searching and finding the connections among content rather than searching just for content.