Of course, some of the private, individual practice can be terribly formed and generally useless for many, so it becomes imperative that students have some strong modeling here from the rhetorical side. What exactly do "good" and "useful" practices look like? How are these annotations used after-the-fact? What purposes do they serve? Can they be reused? Even with open annotations, there is still a lot of additional practice and use which happens beyond the visible annotation which is hidden.

How can we leverage the open annotation and the following process (for example that of Ahrens2017 or Eco2015, 1977) to show more of the workflows of not only learning/understanding/sensemaking, but then taking that material to apply, analyze, evaluate, and then subsequently create new material?

I see a lot of this sort of community sensemaking in the fora for digital note taking tools like Roam Research, Obsidian, Tana, etc. People there may sometimes be more focused on workflows for productivity sake, but there's a lot of subtle learning about note taking practice which is also going on between the lines.

Hypothesis Animated Intro, 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCkm0lL-6lc.

This was an early animation for Hypothes.is as a tool. It was on one of their early homepages and is (still) a pretty good encapsulation of what they do and who they are as a tool for thought.

If I understand it correctly, with hyperaudio, one can also create transcription to somebody else's video or audio when embedded.

In that case, if you add to hyperaudio the annotation capablity of hypothes.is or docdrop, the vision outlined in the article on Global Knowledge Graph is already a reality.

Historical Hypermedia: An Alternative History of the Semantic Web and Web 2.0 and Implications for e-Research. .mp3. Berkeley School of Information Regents’ Lecture. UC Berkeley School of Information, 2010. https://archive.org/details/podcast_uc-berkeley-school-informat_historical-hypermedia-an-alte_1000088371512. archive.org.

https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/events/2010/historical-hypermedia-alternative-history-semantic-web-and-web-20-and-implications-e.

https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/audio/2010-10-20-vandenheuvel_0.mp3

Interface as Thing - book on Paul Otlet (not released, though he said he was working on it)

• W. Boyd Rayward 1994 expert on Otlet
• Otlet on annotation, visualization, of text
• TBL married internet and hypertext (ideas have sex)
• V. Bush As We May Think - crosslinks between microfilms, not in a computer context
• Ted Nelson 1965, hypermedia

t=540

• Michael Buckland book about machine developed by Emanuel Goldberg antecedent to memex
• Emanuel Goldberg and His Knowledge Machine: Information, Invention, and Political Forces (New Directions in Information Management) by Michael Buckland (Libraries Unlimited, (March 31, 2006)
• Otlet and Goldsmith were precursors as well

four figures in his research: - Patrick Gattis - biologist, architect, diagrams of knowledge, metaphorical use of architecture; classification - Paul Otlet, Brussels born - Wilhelm Ostwalt - nobel prize in chemistry - Otto Neurath, philosophher, designer of isotype

Paul Otlet

• wrote bibliography on law
• book: Something on Bibliography #wanttoread
• universal decimal classification system
• mundaneum
• Le Corbusier - architect worked with Otlet for building for Mundaneum; See: https://socks-studio.com/2019/05/05/the-shape-of-knowledge-the-mundaneum-by-paul-otlet-and-henri-la-fontaine/

Otlet was interested in both the physical as well as the intangible aspects of the Mundaneum including as an idea, an institution, method, body of work, building, and as a network.<br /> (#t=1020)

Early iPhone diagram?!?

(roughly) armchair to do the things in the web of life (Nelson quote) (get full quote and source for use) (circa 19:30)

compares Otlet to TBL

Michael Buckland 1991 <s>internet of things</s> coinage - did I hear this correctly? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_of_things lists different coinages

Turns out it was "information as thing"<br /> See: https://hypothes.is/a/kXIjaBaOEe2MEi8Fav6QsA

sugane brierre and otlet<br /> "everything can be in a document"<br /> importance of evidence

The idea of evidence implies a passiveness. For evidence to be useful then, one has to actively do something with it, use it for comparison or analysis with other facts, knowledge, or evidence for it to become useful.

transformation of sound into writing<br /> movement of pieces at will to create a new combination of facts - combinatorial creativity idea here. (circa 27:30 and again at 29:00)<br /> not just efficiency but improvement and purification of humanity

put things on system cards and put them into new orders<br /> breaking things down into smaller pieces, whether books or index cards....

Otlet doesn't use the word interfaces, but makes these with language and annotations that existed at the time. (32:00)

Otlet created diagrams and images to expand his ideas

Otlet used octagonal index cards to create extra edges to connect them together by topic. This created more complex trees of knowledge beyond the four sides of standard index cards. (diagram referenced, but not contained in the lecture)

Otlet is interested in the "materialization of knowledge": how to transfer idea into an object. (How does this related to mnemonic devices for daily use? How does it relate to broader material culture?)

Otlet inspired by work of Herbert Spencer

space an time are forms of thought, I hold myself that they are forms of things. (get full quote and source) from spencer influence of Plato's forms here?

Otlet visualization of information (38:20)

S. R. Ranganathan may have had these ideas about visualization too

atomization of knowledge; atomist approach 19th century examples:S. R. Ranganathan, Wilson, Otlet, Richardson, (atomic notes are NOT new either...) (39:40)

Otlet creates interfaces to the world - time with cyclic representation - space - moving cube along time and space axes as well as levels of detail - comparison to Ted Nelson and zoomable screens even though Ted Nelson didn't have screens, but simulated them in paper - globes

Katie Berner - semantic web; claims that reporting a scholarly result won't be a paper, but a nugget of information that links to other portions of the network of knowledge.<br /> (so not just one's own system, but the global commons system)

Mention of Open Annotation (Consortium) Collaboration:<br /> - Jane Hunter, University of Australia Brisbane & Queensland<br /> - Tim Cole, University of Urbana Champaign<br /> - Herbert Van de Sompel, Los Alamos National Laboratory annotations of various media<br /> see:<br /> - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311366469_The_Open_Annotation_Collaboration_A_Data_Model_to_Support_Sharing_and_Interoperability_of_Scholarly_Annotations - http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/20130205/index.html - http://www.openannotation.org/PhaseIII_Team.html

trust must be put into the system for it to work

coloration of the provenance of links goes back to Otlet (~52:00)

Creativity is the friction of the attention space at the moments when the structural blocks are grinding against one another the hardest. —Randall Collins (1998) The sociology of philosophers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (p.76)

Modeling annotation and note taking can allow students to see that their voices matter in conversation with the "greats" of knowledge. We can and should question authority. Even if one's internal voice questions as one reads, that might be enough, but modeling active reading and note taking can better underline and empower these modes of thought.

There are certainly currents within American culture that we can and should question authority.

Sadly some parts of conservative American culture are reverting back to paternalized power structures of "do as I say and not as I do" which leads to hypocrisy and erosion of society.

Education can be used as a means of overcoming this, though it requires preventing the conservative right from eroding this away from the inside by removing books and certain thought from the education process that prevents this. Extreme examples of this are Warren Jeff's control of religion, education, and social life within his Mormon sect.

Link to: - Lawrence Principe examples of the power establishment in Western classical education being questioned. Aristotle wasn't always right. The entire history of Western science is about questioning the status quo. (How can we center this practice not only in science, but within the humanities?)

My evolving definition of active reading now explicitly includes the ideas of annotating the text, having a direct written conversation with it, questioning it, and expanding upon it. I'm not sure I may have included some or all of these in it before. This is what "reading with a pen in hand" (or digital annotation tool) should entail. What other pieces am I missing here which might also be included?

Ton has asked some good questions about social annotation using @Hypothes_is. I've annotated with some of my ideas. I'm also curious what others' practices look like.

https://twitter.com/ton_zylstra/status/1513219186524368896

Come give your answers in the margins: https://via.hypothes.is/https://www.zylstra.org/blog/2022/04/three-questions-about-annotating-in-hypothesis/

syndication links: - twitter - zylstra.org

https://www.zylstra.org/blog/2022/04/three-questions-about-annotating-in-hypothesis/

Thanks for asking these questions Ton! I've been meaning to spend some time writing up my use cases and methods for this for a while, and your questions have created a scaffold for getting a large chunk of it done in some bite sized pieces. Now I should be able to roll up my answers into an article, do some light editing and be on my way.

In other words, you can build on this software in your proprietary software but can't change the Trailblazer source unless you're willing to contribute it back.

loophole: I wonder if this will actually just push people to move their code -- which at the core is/would be a direction modification to the source code - out to a separate module. That's so easy to do with Ruby, so this restriction hardly seems like it would have any effect on encouraging contributions.

Opening up social annotation and connecting it to a network of researchers' public-facing zettelkasten could create a sea-change of thought

This is a broader concept I'm developing, but thought I'd bookmark this question here as an indicator that others are also interested in the question though they may not have a means of getting there (yet).

A verb for Open Annotate can be called "opnotate". And a noun for open annotation can be "opnotation".

Therein lies the rub. Especially if this is to be “easy”.

Whaa..? This sounds seriously hard. But remarkably clever.

Here I have highlighted the title of the Compass Journal. I can add my notes here and also links like this to the Clipper Blog. I can also insert images like this

I wonder if she would close comments on her site if all were constructive? From my read, it wasn't that she didn't want to engage in conversation.

Another big thank you! As I've mentioned on Twitter, your course's "re/turn" to a previous Marginal Syllabus conversation (from October) is what Joe, Jeremy, and I hoped would happen over time - that educators would find conversations and texts that resonate with their interests and courses, and then join the text-based conversation via ongoing annotation. This turns the text-as-conversation into an open educational resource (OER), and - like you - we hope other educators and courses revisit these conversations to support their own learning.

I've had students say similar things about using Hypothesis to read together. I'd like to explore the relationship between open/collaborative web annotation and community-building... many questions to consider...

Awesome. Is it possible to connect with some of these posts and perspectives?

This is important, and in my teaching I've been careful to include web annotation in both private (group) and public modes so that learners find comfort with different approaches and can come to appreciate some of the scaffolding that you describe.

You're very welcome, and we're appreciative of your willingness to merge formal course activities with the more open-ended and interest-driven approach to educator learning via Marginal Syllabus.

A publicly visible and annotated syllabus is a great practice, and something I'll incorporate into courses - great idea!

This is quickly going to become a bit meta... :)

Indeed!

Hi there, I am using this open source tool to promote open science by make open annotations directly on the was as a platform for collaboration. You also can jot down your comments in the context where it belongs.

This pithy statement brings together all sorts of previous annotations. Would be neat to map them.

That’s something we’ve been doing, yes.

Could soooo imagine a presentation on using #Hypothesis with #PressBooks!

I'd like to hear discussion around the term "open" here. How exactly are you using it @remiholden? To mean public as opposed to private?

For me, open has specific infrastructural connotations: it's about a variety of annotation clients like hypothes.is conforming to certain wider standards so that web annotation--like the web itself--is an interoperable system.

But I'm curious the degree to which that matters to teachers and learners. And why? We're using hypothes.is, which promises to conform to standards being developed by the w3c, but could DIIGO do the trick even though they're system (for now) is closed?

While technology doesn't solve everything, I firmly believe it has a critical role to play in fixing our politics. Better and easier ways for citizens to hold their government accountable, engage with their elected officials and each other, and way more exist. We're using one right now.

An opportunity to employ online, open co-creation tools. Such as, say, Hypothes.is. Or what the D.C.'s Mayor Bowser and city council are doing with the Madison online policymaking software.

Back when this was still being negotiated in secret, a leaked chapter of TPP was opened on the very first version of Madison. What could've been as far as harnessing open online annotation for transparent, smarter policy outcomes.

Series of webinars on the pedagogy of Web annotation.

The “Open World Assumption” is central to this post and to the actual shift in paradigm when it comes to moving from documents to data. People/institutions have an alleged interest in protecting the way their assets are described. Even libraries. The Open World Assumption makes it sound quite chaotic, to some ears. And claims that machine learning will solve everything tend not to help the unconvinced too much. Something to note is that this ability to say something about a third party’s resource connects really well with Web annotations (which do more than “add metadata” to those resources) and with the fact that no-cost access to some item of content isn’t the end of the openness.

Fine by me.

Man kann wunderbarerweise auch Annotationen annotieren.

so do I.

Dies gilt jedenfalls, wenn Annotationstools so einfach und intuitiv gestaltet sind wie dieser Annotator.