Great start! I added some links there. 😊 Given that Web Annotation's have their own protocol (based on LDP), I'd prefer we aim for that target.
The LDP style paging was considered by the Working Group, but we went with ActivityStreams-style paging because ordering matters--see this note from the spec: "Activity Streams Collection [activitystreams-core<https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol/#bib-activitystreams-core>] model is used for paging, as in-page ordering is an important requirement." -- see https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol/#h-summary LDP's ordering, iirc, was "random" or at least didn't express explicit ordering, but you know more about LDP than I do. 😊 Thoughts? -- http://bigbluehat.com/ http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung ________________________________ From: ajs6f <aj...@apache.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 12:17 PM To: dev@annotator.incubator.apache.org Cc: Randall Leeds Subject: Re: LDP and persistence Was: introduction Sure-- I've made a page at: https://github.com/apache/incubator-annotator/wiki/LDP-and-Web-Annotation-Protocol-Implementations although I don't know that there's really a wrong way for us to go about this! :grin: I'm afraid that I'm not aware of any other Web Annotation Protocol-specific impls, but that says more about my ignorance than anything else. On paging in particular, are we committed to building on the Activity Streams model via https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-protocol/#annotation-pages ? ajs6f > On Jan 23, 2019, at 1:51 PM, Benjamin Young <byo...@bigbluehat.com> wrote: > > Agreed! Perhaps we could start by building a list on the wiki (and later the > site) of LDP and Web Annotation Protocol (specific) implementations. > > Once we have that, I'd reckon some browser-side client plumbing would be in > order (i.e. annotation service discovery, code to get a collection of > annotations based on the current documents URI, pagination across annotation > collections, etc). > > Sound about right? > > > -- > > http://bigbluehat.com/ > > http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung > > ________________________________ > From: Randall Leeds <rand...@apache.org> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 1:16 PM > To: dev@annotator.incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: LDP and persistence Was: introduction > > This makes good sense to me. > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 09:59 ajs6f <aj...@apache.org wrote: > >> Hi, Benjamin-- >> >> No problem. I'm obviously not all that good about quick response myself! :0 >> >> It seems to me that these two things (the relationship to LDP and the >> question of backend persistence) could be connected: is it not possible to >> choose LDP for the data storage abstraction layer for Annotator? Of course, >> we would probably have to pick at least one LDP implementation to package >> with Annotator as a choice for those who "choose not to choose" for >> themselves or for people who are just interested in playing with web >> annotation and don't need to think about production deployment. >> >> If we chose LDP for the abstraction layer, then we could also choose a >> default component that can use whatever we think are appropriate concrete >> forms for persistence. (Benjamin Goering mentioned using widely-available >> RDBMSes, for example, which is certainly a good and common pattern, and >> plenty of LDP impls can use them.) >> >> One reason I suggest this: if we choose for a lower-level persistence >> abstraction (e.g. working directly against an SQL backend) and given that >> the Web Annotation protocol extends LDP, we will find ourselves rewriting >> code that LDP implementations have already written and which already is >> tested in use. >> >> ajs6f >> >>> On Jan 15, 2019, at 9:55 AM, Benjamin Young <byo...@bigbluehat.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hey Adam! >>> >>> First, huge apologies for letting this slip through the cracks caused by >> all the holiday-ing (at least for me ;) )! >>> >>> Second, you're spot on about Web Annotation Protocol being essentially >> an extension of the Linked Data Platform (LDP) [1] spec. Also, Web >> Annotations, being based on JSON-LD, can be stored into any triple store. >> The server-side implementations tested by the W3C so far [2] have used the >> filesystem, a relational database, or a JSON-friendly NoSQL database >> (MongoDB, Apache CouchDB, PouchDB, etc). >>> >>> Honestly, database selection is one of the things that has tripped me up >> in contributing a server implementation. I want it to be database/store >> agnostic, ideally, but that comes with it's own "tyranny of choice" among >> data storage abstraction layers. 😋 >>> >>> In the end, it's up to the group to decide what to build and what to >> build on and in what language...etc. >>> >>> Most of the work has gone into the DOM connective tissue code, and I've >> brought over some of the Web Annotation Data Model validation code [3]. >> There's still more to do on all fronts. 😊 >>> >>> Let me know if you have thoughts on the plans here. Your experience with >> Jena (both as a project and a tool) would be very helpful! >>> >>> Cheers! >>> Benjamin >>> >>> >>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/ >>> [2] >> https://github.com/w3c/test-results/tree/gh-pages/annotation-protocol#index-of-implementations-tested >>> [3] >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-annotator/blob/master/test/data-model.mjs >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> http://bigbluehat.com/ >>> >>> http://linkedin.com/in/benjaminyoung >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: ajs6f <aj...@apache.org> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2019 4:14 PM >>> To: dev@annotator.incubator.apache.org >>> Subject: introduction >>> >>> Hi, Annnotator folks! >>> >>> My name is Adam Soroka and I'm a committer for Apache Jena. For a day >> job I work at the Smithsonian Institution and I've been interested in >> semantic technology for quite a while in the context of so-called cultural >> heritage. I watched the W3C Web Annotation WG with interest and I was happy >> to see extensions developed for the International Image Interoperability >> Framework [1]. >>> >>> I'm still a little uncertain about the scope of the Annotator project. >> It seems to include a node.js server component to store and manage >> annotations as well as browser-side tooling. I was under the impression >> (very likely wrong!) that annotations, as RDF graphs, could be stored in >> anything that can store RDF (triplestores, etc.) and that in particular, >> LDP implementations should be able to support the annotation protocol >> (almost?) directly. Is this wrong? Are there special requirements on >> annotation servers that make it appropriate to use a special-purpose part? >>> >>> Thanks for any clarification/info/advice! >>> >>> ajs6f >>> >>> [1] https://iiif.io/api/annex/openannotation/index.html >> >>
