23 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2018
    1. without opening a separate tab)

      "In general, it is better not to open new windows and tabs since they can be disorienting for people, especially people who have difficulty perceiving visual content."

      https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G200.html

  2. Oct 2018
    1. Relevant vocabularies A combination of some W3C and third-party vocabularies can be used to formally capture the Technical Reports metadata in RDF. The following list summarizes these vocabularies: Event-based model of the W3C process Online documentation: http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54 Namespace: http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54# Ontology of the W3C organizational structure Namespace: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/roadmap/org# Vocabulary to annotate W3C TR with regard to Quality Assurance Online documentation: http://www.w3.org/2002/05/matrix/vocab Namespace: http://www.w3.org/2002/05/matrix/vocab# Vocabulary to describe document relationships and licenses Namespace: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/doc# Vocabulary for contact information Namespace: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact# Dublin Core Metadata Terms Online documentation: http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/ Namespace: http://purl.org/dc/terms/ Note that some of these vocabularies are published by W3C, but they have no formal standing (they are not W3C Recommendations). In the following, it is assumed that the following namespace aliases are defined: Prefix Namespace rec: http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54# org: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/roadmap/org# mat: http://www.w3.org/2002/05/matrix/vocab# doc: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/doc# con: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact# dct: http://purl.org/dc/terms/
  3. May 2018
  4. Sep 2017
  5. Aug 2017
    1. <script src="https://hypothes.is/embed.js" async></script>

      One line of code adds open, standards-based annotation to any website.

  6. Jun 2017
    1. The whole point of the newly-minted web annotation standard is to enable an ecosystem of interoperable annotation clients and servers, analogous to comparable ecosystems of email and web clients and servers.

      I think one of the ideas I'm struggling with here. Is web annotation just about research, or to advance conversation on the web? I sense this is part of decentralization too (thus, an ecosystem), but where does it fit?

  7. Apr 2017
    1. Really useful session well worth your time! All the longed for teacher, student, researcher, creator & user annotation desires for the web, at long last on the way to fulfilment!

  8. Feb 2017
    1. Felt way more appropriate to comment here than in the comments at the body of the page :).

      It was humbling to interact act with such dedicated researchers and practitioners and to watch these documents take shape.

      Thanks, everyone!

    1. The W3C’s existence depends on its mission being grounded in moral certainty. That certainty is the only substantial obstacle preventing it from being replaced with easier, more pragmatic standardisation efforts that focus exclusively on implementation.

      End of the W3C's influence?

    1. A URI can be further classified as a locator, a name, or both. The term "Uniform Resource Locator" (URL) refers to the subset of URIs that, in addition to identifying a resource, provide a means of locating the resource by describing its primary access mechanism (e.g., its network "location").
    1. Many Annotations refer to part of a resource, rather than all of it, as the Target. We call that part of the resource a Segment (of Interest). A Selector is used to describe how to determine the Segment from within the Source resource.
  9. Feb 2016
    1. The feed is how stuff enters their content system. But the feed itself is outside, leaving it available for other services to use. It's great when this happens, rather than doing it via a WG that tend to go on for years, and create stuff that's super-complicated, why not design something that works for you, put it out there with no restrictions and let whatever's going to happen happen.

      Interesting approach for hypothes.is to consider?

  10. Nov 2015
    1. If you have a copy of the ReSpec repository handy, you may see that there is also a respec2html.js tool under tools/. Feel free to try using it instead of the above process, but please note that it is not used much currently and may behave in a somewhat experimental manner (experiences with it vary — but it's worth a shot if you're looking for a way to generate ReSpec output from the command line).

      Respec (sadly) doesn't quite have a command line tool...at least not one comparable to a browser's output.

      Maybe PhantomJS (which Respec uses for tests) would do a better job?

  11. Oct 2015
    1. Having these two axioms in place and given e.g. the information that Sasha is related to Hillary via the property hasWife, a reasoner would be able to infer that Sasha is a man and Hillary a woman.

      Not necessarily. Increasingly same-sex marriages are more widely accepted. W3C should re-visit their documentation to ensure that they're not excluding LGBTQ populations and don't perpetuate heteronormativity.

  12. Sep 2015
    1. The W3C Annotation Working Group has a joint deliverable with the W3C Web Application Working Group called “Robust Anchoring”. This deliverable will provide a general framework for anchoring; and, although defined within the framework of annotations, the specification can also be used for other fragment identification use cases. Similarly, the W3C Media Fragments specification [media-frags] may prove useful to address some of the use cases. Finally, the Streamable Package Format draft, mentioned above, also includes a fragment identification mechanism. Would that package format be adopted for EPUB+WEB, that fragment identification may also come to the fore as an important mechanism to consider.

      Anchors are a key issue. Hope that deliverable will suffice.

  13. Aug 2015
    1. Packages can be used to populate caches associated with multiple URLs without making multiple requests.

      Alex Russell, a Googler who loves Chrome but hates app stores, is passionate about this.

      Interesting chatter at https://mobile.twitter.com/fabricedesre/status/636014195893342208

  14. May 2015
    1. Most of these difficulties would be addressed by the fundamental characteristics of a digital annotation system. The digital annotation system would automatically store and link annotations and sources with machine tidiness. As noted above, it is more than likely in a distributed system that annotations will be stored separately from the sources to which they refer. However, unlike the real-world equivalents, they would automatically hold information that links them effectively to the associated source. However, it is incumbent upon that system to display a clear association between annotation and source. But the potentially limitless capacity of an electronic writing space, indeed one that expands its viewing size to the later reader commensurate with the size of text inserted, would easily resolve the analogue annotator's problem of insufficient writing space. Moreover, it is worth taking into consideration the change that such expanded capacity may have upon the behaviour of annotators; an uncramped writing space may equally 'uncramp' their style and encourage them to be more expansive and, possibly, more informative. Equally important, there is no limit upon subsequent annotations relating to the original source or, for that matter, to the initial annotation. Clearly an example where the distributed nature of digital annotation presents a clear advantage. Even a clearer annotation generally still lacks all or some of the following: an author, or author status, a date or time, and where the annotation relies on other text or supporting evidence, (e.g. "This contradicts his view in Chapter 3"), it may have no clear direct reference either. A further complication might be the annotations, (or even counter-annotations) of another anonymous party. It is worth remarking that a digital system would be able to record the date and time of the annotation action, the source, and give some indication of the person who initiated the marking. If it were deemed unacceptable in certain systems, the annotation could be rejected as giving inadequate content. Once again the advantage of virtually unlimited writing space would allow the annotator to quote, if desired, the text to which (s)he refers elsewhere; alternatively the functionality that permits the annotator to highlight a source could also be adapted to permit the highlighting of a reference item for inclusion in the annotation body as a hypertext link. Some, but not necessarily all of the analogue difficulties may have been encountered; but they all serve to illustrate the difficulties that arise the moment annotations cease only to be read by their original author. It is outside that limited context that we largely need to consider annotations in the distributed digital environment. Picking up on this aspect, we might therefore consider the challenge posed by any system of annotation that intends to have an audience of greater than one, and, conceivably of scores or hundreds of annotators and annotation readers. Irrespective of their number, what makes such multiple annotations unreliable is one's ignorance of the kind of person who made the annotation: expert? amateur? joker? authority? Who wrote the annotation probably ranks as more important than any other undisclosed information about it. In this regard an annotator is no different from an author or writer of papers. Understanding the authority with which an annotation is made can be a key determinant in users' behaviour when accessing annotations across a distributed system.

      refs to role of UX in enabling digital annot to best "handwritten annots"

  15. Apr 2015
    1. This part of the Character Model for the World Wide Web covers string matching—the process by which a specification or implementation defines whether two string values are the same or different from one another.
  16. Nov 2014
    1. Still, there are hints that, while the discussion of the group is still being framed, the bitcoin industry could assert itself in the process through greater involvement.

      "Hints"? That's the whole point. Participation is all there is. Do it.