4 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2022
    1. With Hypothesis, you can add suggestions and additions as an overlay on current content easily and quickly.  For example, you can provide proper citations or additional information on a topic, note grammatical errors or factual inaccuracies. Experienced Wikipedia editors can then follow up and work with you to add your recommendations to the article.

      The problem with this, generally, but esp. affecting wikis in particular, is that you end up with orphaned and irrelevant/out-of-date annotations.

      Hypothes.is should select an appropriate link relation (in the vein of what it now does with canonical) and scope the annotation appropriately—even if the user does not actually have his or her browser pointed at the exact revision that is "current".

  2. Jul 2021
    1. I like the hovercard-like UI that enables one to see prior versions of links on a page. It would be cool to have this sort of functionality built into preview cards for these as well.

      <small><cite class='h-cite via'> <span class='p-author h-card'>Jonathan Zittrain</span> in The Rotting Internet Is a Collective Hallucination - The Atlantic (<time class='dt-published'>07/08/2021 22:07:17</time>)</cite></small>

    1. A solid overview article about the architectural deficiencies of the web for long term archival and access as well as some ideas for fixing the issue and a plea to attempt to make things better for the future.

    2. Suppose Google were to change what’s on that page, or reorganize its website anytime between when I’m writing this article and when you’re reading it, eliminating it entirely. Changing what’s there would be an example of content drift; eliminating it entirely is known as link rot.

      We don't talk about content drift very much. I like that some sites, particularly wiki sites, actually document their content drift in diffs and surface that information directly to the user. Why don't we do this for more websites? The Wayback machine also has this sort of feature.