Problems with new beta spec

[Sebastian Hellmann]

Dear all,
I hope this is the right mailing list to give feedback on the new beta
core specification ( http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/ )

1. Could somebody please replace the examples with realistic ones? The
document is very difficult to understand. Examples that are too generic
are not helpful, e.g.

<Anno1> a oa:Annotation ;
oa:hasBody <Body1> ;
oa:hasTarget <Target1> .

<Target1> a <Type1> ;
dc:format "mimetype1" .


2. Can there be more than one body per annotation? Why do you need the
Annotation node then? You would have to create an extra URI without a
reason.

3. The arguments against URI Fragments are very confusing, and I am not
sure what is meant exactly. e.g.
"If the Target of the Annotation was a resource with a fragment URI,
then it would not be possible to query for the Source's URI directly."
Technically, URI's are not queried, instead URL's are retrieved. With a
URL containing a hash-fragment, the client would strip the #-part and
retrieve the whole content of the resource and then select the
respective fragment addressed by the fragment identifier. That is quite
a "direct" action in my opinion.


I am just asking, because we are developing the NLP Interchange Format
within LOD2. See
http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2012/WWW_NIF/public/string_ontology.pdf for
the latest version and http://nlp2rdf.org/about for the project. The
goal is of course to make it compatible with your effort and provide a
transition.


Could somebody make an OpenAnnotation example for me that covers the
example in NIF? i.e. annotate a substring within a web page:
http://pcai042.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~swp12-9/vorprojekt/index.php?annotation_request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FDesignIssues%2FLinkedData.html%23hash_10_12_60f02d3b96c55e137e13494cf9a02d06_Semantic%2520Web
Attach a comment, e.g. "Hey Tim, good idea that Semantic Web!" to the
first occurrence of "Semantic Web" in this resource:
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html

All the best,
Sebastian


--
Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
Projects:http://nlp2rdf.org ,http://dbpedia.org
Homepage:http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianHellmann
Research Group:http://aksw.org

[Sebastian Hellmann]

Sorry, I just read that comments are supposed to go to
public-ope...@w3.org .
I forwarded the mail there.
All the best,
Sebastian

Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://dbpedia.org

[Robert Sanderson]

Response provided on the Open Annotation W3C list, please provide
additional feedback there :)

Rob

[Sebastian Hellmann]

Hi Robert, dear list,

cc-by-sa-nc is not considered "open" according to
http://opendefinition.org due to the non commercial (nc) part. Do you
have commercial interests with the specification? The licence seems to
be very unlike the W3C, who claims to provide recommendations as
Royality Free:
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Licensing

Personally, I am always unsure what people intend with adding
non-commercial to their licence. It implies that I would have to pay
something in case I am using any part in a commercial application. Is
this the intention?

The NLP Interchange format will be CC-BY, which is the licence most
appropriate for academic content in my opinion.

[Sebastian Hellmann]

Sorry, I hit reply on the wrong email, forwarding to
public-ope...@w3.org,
Sebastian