> So this is my recommended framework for proceeding. Tim, I'm afraid you'll > actually have to do the hard work yourself.
No, I don't. Because the work isn't fundamentally that hard. A complex standard might be, but I never for a moment considered anything like that. We have *512 bytes*, and it needs to be usable by anyone. Library technology is usually fatally over-engineered, but this is a case where that approach isn't even possible. > You aren't going to get something good just by getting some listserv to vote. My suggestion was to have people interested in actually using it vote. > Many of us involved in this discussion may find this intellectually > interesting, but may have no actual use _ourselves_ for such a format anyway. Oh, I bet half of you guys have sharing buttons on your OPAC or elsewhere. And many of you are on Twitter and, at least occasionally, discuss a book. > If Amazon or someone like that comes up with something, it will end up > becoming the 'de facto' standard, so I recommend trying to talk to Amazon to > see if they're thinking about this -- or just wait to see if/what Amazon > comes up with, and use that. You're right. It's a thankless task to get even a subset of library technologists to agree on something like this. It'd be less important if I didn't know the Amazon solution will leave off key pieces libraries need. Then, three years from now, we can all conference-tweet about a CIL talk, about all the cool ways libraries are using Twitter, and how it's such a shame that the annotations standard wasn't designed with libraries in mind. Best, Tim